M 218/2017

Supdt. of Post Offices vs. Sidheshwar Nath

2.8.2017

          Put up today. Counsel for the parties present. Counsel for the applicant/respondent has moved an application for correction of the judgment in the appeal no.2361 of 1997 as in the judgment dated 8.6.2017, the name of the OP no.6/4 has been wrongly typed and also in the judgment due to typing error 9% has been typed in place of 10%.

Perused the original judgment and the records. It is clear from the original appeal that the name of the respondent no.6/4 is Mithlesh whereas it has been typed as Muthlesh. So obviously it is a correct clerical error. Besides in the judgment it was found appropriate to award 10% interest in place of 13%, as is evident from para 4 of the page 4 but 9% has been typed in place of 10% which again is a clerical error. Therefore, these clerical errors are to be corrected. The application is, therefore, allowed and the corrections be made in the judgment.

Subsequently, correction made accordingly.

              (Vijai Varma)                     (Raj Kamal Gupta)

        Presiding Member                          Member

Jafri PA II

Court no.3