( 1 ) THE petitioner was the plaintiff in O. S. No. 237/2000 before the Civil Judge, (Jr. Dn.), Gokak. The said suit was filed by him to correct his date of birth. The suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed as not maintainable. Against which he had filed an appeal before the Civil Judge, (Sr. Dn.), Gokak in R. A. 43/2004. On 27. 6. 2004 the Civil Judge, (Sr. Dn.), Gokak, remitted the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration by framing an additional issue. The Trial Court again hearing the counsel for the petitioner, after framing an additional issue confirmed the earlier order and dismissed the suit on 21. 9. 2005. Thereafter the petitioner herein filed an application to draw a decree which application has been dismissed by the Court on the ground that a decree has been drawn on an earlier occasion, therefore held that there is no necessity to draw a decree afresh. This order is called in question in this Writ Petition. ( 2 ) THOUGH the matter is listed for preliminary, this Court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having heard the counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion, notice to the other side can be dispensed with as the Trial Court has committed an error in dismissing the application of the petitioner on the ground that there is no necessity for the Court to pass a decree again when once a decree is passed on 2. 7. 2004. The learned Judge did not notice that the earlier decree dated 2. 7. 2004 was set aside by the Appellate Court in R. A. No. 43/2004 by setting aside the decree dated 2. 7. 2004, the matter was remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration. ( 3 ) IF the Trial Court has confirmed the earlier Judgment, it is the duty of the Court to pass a decree in terms of the Judgment passed pursuant to the order of remand. ( 4 ) THEREFORE, the Trial Court is not justified in dismissing the application since it is only a technical error committed by the Trial Court. By dispensing with the notice to the other side, this petition is allowed directing the Trial Court to draw the decree in terms of the order dated 21. 9. 2005.