Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (1.31 seconds)
Chinna Marudachalam And Anr. vs Chinnaiya Gounder Alias Renganna ... on 6 December, 1996 cites

L. Janakirama Iyer And Others vs P. M. Nilakanta Iyer And Others on 26 October, 1961

In Janakirama Iyer v. Nilakanta Iyer , the decree as drawn up in the High Court had used the words "mesne profits" instead of "net profits". In fact the use of the words "mesne profits" came to be made probably because while narrating the facts, these words were inadvertently used in the judgment. This Court held that the use of the words "mesne profits' in the context was obviously the result of inadvertence in view of the fact that the decree of the trial court had specifically used the words "net profits" and therefore the decretal order drawn up in the High Court through mistake could be corrected under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code even after the High Court had granted certificate and appeals were admitted in this Court before the date of the correction. It is true that under Order 20, Rule 3 of the Code once a judgment is signed by the Judge it cannot be altered or added to but the rule expressly provides that a correction can be made under Section 152. The Rule does not also affect the court's inherent power under Section 151. Under Section 152, clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the court either on its own motion or on an application by any of the parties. It is thus manifest that errors arising from an accidental slip can be corrected subsequently not only in a decree drawn up by a ministerial officer of the court but even in a judgment pronounced and signed by the court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 129 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document
1   2 Next