Bombay High Court
LAXMIBAI DADARAM MHASKE AND OTHERSversusTHE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KRISHNA KHORE MAHAMANDAL MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION-I AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- SANJAY A DESHMUKH
Holding
The court may correct inadvertent typographical errors in its orders.
Summary
The Executive Engineer, Krishna Khore Mahamandal filed a motion to correct typographical errors in the minutes of an order dated 08.04.2026. The appellant’s counsel pointed out that the phrase “learned AGP” was mistakenly typed instead of “learned Advocate for the appellant/acquiring body”. The court considered the submission and allowed the motion, directing that the necessary corrections be made and the corrected order be uploaded. No substantive legal issues were raised beyond the correction of the clerical mistake. The order was thus amended to reflect the correct terminology.
Issues considered
- Whether the court may correct inadvertent typographical errors in its own orders without a fresh hearing
Subjects
- court order correction
- minutes
- typographical error
- civil procedure
- speaking to minutes
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:15081
This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
Speaking.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
955 FIRST APPEAL NO. 496 OF 2014
The Executive Engineer, Krishna Khore Mahamandal
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Rajale Gulab B., Advocate for Appellant
Mr. S. G. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. Shubham Jaybhar h/f Mr. D. R. Jaybhar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5040 OF 2016 IN FA/565/2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 569 OF 2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 570 OF 2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 565 OF 2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 566 OF 2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 568 OF 2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 567 OF 2014 AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5034 OF 2016 IN FA/566/2014 AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.1313 OF 2014
….
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 15.04.2026
PER COURT :-
1. This motion is moved for speaking to the minutes in
respect of order dated 08.04.2026.
2. Learned advocate for the appellant submits that in line
No.1 of paragraph No.3 and in line No.5 of paragraph No.4 on
page No.2 of the said order, it has been inadvertently typed as
“learned AGP” instead of “learned Advocate for the
1 of 2
This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
(( 2 )) Speaking
appellant/acquiring body”.
3. Considering the submissions of the learned advocate for the
appellant, motion is allowed and disposed of.
4. Necessary corrections be carried out and corrected order be
uploaded accordingly.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
HRJadhav
2 of 2
Checking your session…