The High Court allowed an application to rectify an order in a first appeal regarding a compromise sum of Rs. 3,16,000. The court deleted the erroneous term 'in addition' and directed it to read as 'by way of compensation to the amount awarded.'
The application for rectification of the order dated 10th February, 2018 was allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCC No. 231 of 2018
Versus
---- Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Wasim Miyan, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma Order On Board
06/04/2018
C.C. Today.
Sd/- (Ram Prasanna Sharma)
Judge
Santosh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order dated 10th February, 2018 should be rectified due to a typographical error using the word 'in addition' instead of 'by way of compensation'.
Junior Engineer/ Assistant Engineer Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board
Chief Engineer
President/ Chairman Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board
Gomti Bai
Jhumuk Lal
State Of Chhattisgarh
Ram Prasanna Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
