Arjun Kohli v. Vishal Prajapati
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge allowed amendment to correct a clerical error in a prior order, changing the reference from 'judgment debtor' to 'decree holder' in paragraph 3 regarding transfer of a decree.
What did the court decide?
para 3 of the order dated 11th December 2018 is corrected to read 'decree holder' instead of 'judgment debtor'.
What the court decided
$~O-32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- EX.P. 90/2018
ARJUN KOHLI ..... Decree Holder
Through Mr.Shashank Sharma, Advocate versus
VISHAL PRAJAPATI ..... Judgement Debtor Through
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
O R D E R % 15.01.2019
E.A.(OS) 8/2019
- The decree holder is seeking correction of the order dated 11th December, 2018 insofar as the word ‘judgment debtor’ has been mentioned instead of ‘decree holder’ in last line of para 3.
- The application is allowed and para 3 of the order dated 11th December, 2018 is corrected and the word ‘judgment debtor’ is corrected and be read as ‘decree holder’. The corrected para 3 of the order dated 11th December, 2018 shall read as under:
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order dated 11th December 2018 should be corrected to change the term 'judgment debtor' to 'decree holder' in para 3.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
ARJUN KOHLI
- respondent
VISHAL PRAJAPATI
Coram
J.R. MIDHA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court