suit property in question. Defendant
had taken the benefit of typographical error on the original sale deed
dated 29.06.1974 whereas the copy of sale deed ... Rohtash Singh Vs. Avadh Bihari.
66/4 is only typographical error. Hence, it can not come in the way of
title of plaintiff
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
defendant No.21 but in cause of action para, a typographical error
was crept that they came to know about the execution of sale deed ... month of January, 2016 only, whereas there is
a typographical error crept in the cause of action para No.V where
17
instead of mentioning
that the
petitioners have attempted to derive advantage of certain
apparent typographical errors in the question paper. Had such
typographical errors been of such consequence ... where the petitioners are trying to derive advantage of
another typographical error inasmuch as the word „past‟ has
been typed in place of the word
