This is worth saying plainly, because the presentation invites the opposite conclusion. A 3×3 square of planets looks like a reading of you. It is a tally of digits — and once you have seen the five steps, you can produce your own grid on paper in under a minute and check anything a practitioner tells you about it.
So this grid has two repeated numbers, 7 and 8, and two missing ones, 4 and 6. Read across the fixed square, the top row holds no 4, one 9 and one 2; the middle row holds one 3, one 5 and two 7s; the bottom row holds two 8s, one 1 and no 6. Every one of those statements is a fact about the date 25/03/1987, and about nothing else.
Steps 3 and 4 are the part that differs between books. Adding the Mulank and Bhagyank to the grid is the common Indian method and the one used here; several Western treatments plot only the digits of the date. That single choice changes which numbers count as missing for a great many people, and no source resolves it — so if another calculator gives you a different grid, this is almost always why.