Order correcting a typographical error in the appearance section of a previous order copy dated 10.10.2025. The court directed the registry to issue a fresh order copy incorporating the advocate's name for the 2nd respondent.
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.
C.M.A(MD) No.890 of 2010
R. POORNIMA, J.
C.M.A(MD) No.890 of 2010
This matter has been listed today, under the caption 'for
being mentioned', at the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.
2.The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that
in the order dated 10.10.2025, the advocate for the 2nd respondent name has not been mentioned in the appearance and prayed to implead her name, since the above mistake is a typographical error.
order copy after incorporating the following changes in the appearance of the order dated 10.10.2025 :
“For Respondents :M/s.P.Malini – for R2
1/2
C.M.A(MD) No.890 of 2010
R.POORNIMA, J.
RM
4. The Registry is directed to issue fresh order copy to the
parties.
17.12.2025
RM
C.M.A(MD) No.890 of 2010
17.12.2025
2/2
R. Poornima
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
