Allowed

Sivaji Arul Selvam and Another v. Nil

Madras HC23 Nov 2021A/4031/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application sought modification of an earlier order due to a clerical error regarding the issuance authority for a birth certificate. The court allowed the application and directed the Registry to substitute the original order copy.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed; the second prayer in the earlier order was modified to direct the Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, to issue the birth certificate.

Sivaji Arul Selvam and Another Vs Nil — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

A.No.4031 of 2021 in O.A.No.1085 of 2019

¶2

A.No.4031 of 2021

¶3

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J

¶4

O.P.No.1085 of 2019 was disposed of by order dated

¶5

29.01.2020. The present application is filed on the ground that a clerical error was made in the petition by seeking a direction to the birth certificate issuing authority, Chengalpet, Kancheepuram District, and that, therefore, such error was also reflected in the order of this Court. The Applicant/Petitioner submits that such direction should have instead been sought for and issued to the Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ribbon Building, First Floor, Raja Muthaiah Road, Kannaper Thidal, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. The present application is filed for a modification to the above effect.

¶6

Upon considering the said submission and on examining the affidavit in support of the application, I find that the request for modification is liable to be allowed since such

¶7

1 of 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶8

A.No.4031 of 2021

¶9

request is on the basis of a clerical error in describing the authority to whom the direction should be issued.

¶10

Accordingly, Application No.4031 of 2021 is allowed as prayed for by permitting modification of the 2^nd prayer in O.P.No.1085 of 2019 and consequently in the order dated 29.01.2020 in O.P.No.1085 of 2019. Therefore, the last sentence of paragraph 6 of the order in O.P.No.1085 of 2019 should be substituted by the following sentence:

¶11

''Consequently, the Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ribbon Building, First Floor, Raja Muthaiah Road, Kannaper Thidal, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003 is directed to issue the birth certificate of minor child, Monica, within five working days from the date of receipt of the application by incorporating the particulars of the parents.''

¶12

4.The Registry is directed to re-issue the order copy after carrying out the above modification.

¶13

23.11.2021

¶14

rrg

¶15

2 of 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

A.No.4031 of 2021

¶17

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.J,

rrg

A.No.4031 of 2021

23.11.2021

3 of 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sivaji Arul Selvam and Another v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivaji Arul Selvam and Another v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Subramani Vs Ajeez

The Official Assignee Vs G.M.Jayaraman

Official Assignee Vs K.Radhakrishnan

M/s Mepro Technology India Co., Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/s Service and Communication Solutions and another

M/s.Daimler Financial Services India Private Limited Vs Shoba Mangesh Patil and 3 others

M/s.Avexa Corporation Pvt. Ltd, Formerly known as M/s.Sivaswathi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Superintending Engineer, PWD Wro