alleging that at the time of filing
the suit, due to typographical mistake in the plaint schedule it has
been mentioned as 68 cents instead ... state that now
only the petitioners came to know the typographical mistake in the
schedule of property. When the petitioners have stated that they were
that the offer of Rs.1,24,22,002/- was a typographical mistake, which was corrected immediately before the opening of the tender ... offer of Rs.1,24,22,002/- was certainly a typographical mistake as no other bidders have offered more than Rs.22 lakhs. The offer
mentioned in the body of the petition Sanjiv Kumar; but by typographical mistake the spelling of the name of Sanjiv Kumar has been mentioned ... very surprising that the first respondent himself has committed the same typographical mistake in his application taken up before the High Court seeking dismissal
learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioner, it was not a typographical mistake crept in the order of the learned single judge. The mistake ... Division Bench proceeded under the footing that there was a typographical mistake in the order of the learned single Judge and as such the Division
opinion that the inclusion as alleged is a
typographical mistake, as the officer has typed two paragraphs as one
paragraph and however, the point mentioned ... case need not be considered, as the said
contention or typographical mistake made by the authority would not
cause any prejudice to the interest
plaint averment in paragraph 3, by inadvertence and due to a
typographical mistake, he has pleaded that the respondent has admitted
by writing ... come within the preview of a typographical
error. The term typographical error is defined as a
mistake made in the printed/typed material during
learned counsel for the petitioners, the Court below without considering the typographical mistakes committed by the petitioners at the time of filing of the written ... respondents. The petitioners have specifically stated that the aforesaid typographical mistake has been committed in the written statement, only due to the bonafide reasons
error apparent on
the face of the record, save some typographical mistake crept in, in para No.17
of the common judgment in mentioning ... common
judgment, there is no scope for review, except correcting certain typographical
mistakes in para No.17 of the said common judgment, in mentioning
erroneously typed as Rs.
4,800/-. On account of the typographical mistake committed by the office, the
writ petitioner was granted with excess pension. Thus ... opinion that the authorities
competent are empowered to correct the typographical mistakes, if any
occurred during the fixation of pay or pension. In the present
erroneously typed as
Rs.4,800/-. On account of the typographical mistake committed by the office,
the writ petitioner was granted with excess pension. Thus ... opinion that the authorities
competent are empowered to correct the typographical mistakes, if any
occurred during the fixation of pay or pension. In the present
