Suresh Jindal And Anr vs Usha Jindal And Ors on 9 April, 2019
In Shri Jai Singh's case (supra), the suit was decreed
by the lower Appellate Court and thereafter application came to
be filed for correction of description of the property which was
erroneously mentioned due to typographical error in the plaint
and the same was so recorded in the judgment and decree.
Since there was no dispute with regard to the identity of the
7 of 12
::: Downloaded on - 14-04-2019 22:55:52 :::
CR No.6350 of 2017 8
property, therefore, by relying upon Gulazara Singh and others'
case (supra), the Single Bench of this Court allowed correction
of the error in the judgment and decree. In the aforesaid case,
Khasra No.17/2 was inadvertently mentioned as Khasra
No.19/2. The description of the property was mentioned due to
some mistake as Khasra No.19/2 was typed as Khasra No.17/2.
In view of facts and circumstances of the said case which are
akin to the present case, the correction was allowed and the
error mentioned in the description of the plaint, judgment and
decree was rectified/corrected.