Case Note & Summary
The matter before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal involved an application for correction of clerical errors in a previous judgment dated 14th May, 2026. The applicant, VOVL Ltd & Ors, represented by advocates Ms. Swastika Chakravarti and Ms. Mimansha Durgapal, filed an application under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, to include the names of senior counsel and other advocates who had appeared on behalf of the resolution professional but were omitted from the appearance section of the judgment. The respondent, Venugopal Dhoot, represented by advocates Ms. Surabhi Khattar and Ms. Pallavi Agarwal, did not object to the inclusion of these names. The tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and allowed the application, thereby correcting the judgment to reflect the accurate representation of advocates. The application was disposed of with the court's direction to include the names as requested, ensuring the integrity of the judicial record.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Correction of Judgment - Inclusion of Advocates' Names - National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, Rule 11 - The applicant sought correction of clerical errors in the judgment dated 14th May, 2026, specifically the omission of advocates' names. The court allowed the application as the respondent had no objection to the inclusion of the names, thereby ensuring accurate representation in the judgment (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the names of advocates can be corrected in the judgment due to omission.
Final Decision
The application IA No.3949/2026 was allowed, and the names of the advocates were directed to be included in the judgment dated 14th May, 2020.
Law Points
- Correction of clerical errors
- NCLAT Rules
- 2016
- appearance section
