Disposed
P.Subbathal v. P.Murugasamy
Madras HCSA/762/2007
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The Court corrected a clerical error in a prior order dated 12.03.2025 where the dismissal of a second appeal was wrongly recorded instead of allowing it. The corrected text declares the appeal allowed.
What did the court decide?
Registry directed to substitute the concluding portion of the order to reflect that the Second Appeal is allowed.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
S.A.No. 594 of 2007
¶2
S.A.No. 594 of 2007
¶3
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
¶4
This matter was taken up for hearing under the caption “For Being Mentioned” today at the instance of the learned counsel for the appellant.
¶5
- The learned counsel for appellant would submit that this Court by an order dated 12.03.2025 disposed of the above Second Appeal. However, he would submit that in para 15 page 12, concluding portion, instead of mentioning that the above second appeal is allowed, it was mentioned as this Second Appeal is dismissed as no merit. Hence, she prayed to amend the same and requested to issue fresh order copy. Accordingly, the matter has been listed today.
¶6
- Heard the contentions of learned counsel for appellant and
¶7
perused the order.
¶8
- Considering her submissions, Registry is directed to
¶9
substitute the concluding portion of the judgment in para 15 page 12 as follows :-
¶10
1/3
Coram
AI extract
T.V.THAMILSELVI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court