Case Note & Summary
The present order is a clarification of a previous judgment dated 21st December 2016 in Second Appeal No.148 of 2016. By consent of the contesting parties, the court enumerated fourteen corrections to be made in the earlier judgment. These corrections include substituting 'defendant no.2A to 2C' with 'defendant nos.2A to 2D' in paragraphs 1 and 2; correcting the name 'Amappa' to 'Amanappa' in paragraph 3; replacing 'plaintiff no.1' with 'plaintiff' in paragraph 5; adding 'written statement and additional written statement' in paragraph 6; changing the date '26th' to '22nd' in paragraph 18; substituting the figure '281' with '287' in paragraph 24; modifying references to the court and deleting certain words in paragraph 26; adding 'Civil Appeal no.' in paragraph 27; correcting the year '2007' to '2004' in paragraph 29; substituting the date '7th October, 2015' with '30th September, 2015' in paragraph 30; replacing 'Revision' with 'Review' in paragraph 31; and substituting 'Bhanudas' with 'Mahadev' in paragraph 34. The order was passed by Justice R.D. Dhanuka on 8th February 2017. The judgment does not discuss any substantive legal issues beyond the correction of clerical errors.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Correction of Clerical Errors - Section 152 CPC - Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments may be corrected by the court at any time - The court allowed substitution of incorrect party names, dates, and figures to align with the record - Held that such corrections are permissible under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Paras 1-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether clerical and typographical errors in a judgment should be corrected to reflect the true record.
Final Decision
The court allowed the corrections as enumerated in the order, substituting incorrect references with correct ones.
Law Points
- Clerical errors in judgment can be corrected by consent of parties
- Civil Procedure Code
- 1908
- Section 152
