Patel Nagar,
New Delhi. However he stated that it was a typographical error and
actual address was 39/13.
12. The witness denied having received ... High Court of Delhi. Although
he stated that there was a typographical error in the said memo of
parties and his actual address
recorded in
paragraph-2 of the plaint and it is a typographical error and it actually meant Ramu
Hira, which will be demonstrated
against the tenant.
18. Further, in the petition, there appeared a typographical error
and it was clarified that the property was rented
issue was upon the defendant but was
wrongly recorded due to typographical error as upon the plaintiff.
The defendant has failed to show that more
