Supreme Court of India

KESHARBAI @ PUSHPABAI EKNATHRAO NALAWADEversusTARABAI PRABHAKARRAO NALAWADE & ORS.

Citation: 2014 INSC 957
Decided: 4 April 2014
Disposal: Modified
Bench: S S NIJJARA K SIKRI

Holding

The Supreme Court may amend its judgment to restore omitted language that confirms the trial court’s findings, without altering the substantive decision.

Summary

In Civil Appeal No. 3867 of 2014, the Supreme Court observed that a clerical error had omitted the phrase confirming the trial court's findings on Issue III in paragraph 22 of its earlier judgment dated 14 March 2014. The Court directed that the omitted line be restored, thereby amending the judgment to read that the trial court’s decision on Issue III is confirmed and that the suit filed by the plaintiffs is dismissed. The amendment was ordered to correct the inadvertent deletion without altering the substantive outcome of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal is allowed, the trial court’s findings on Issue III are upheld, and the suit is dismissed. The order reflects the Court’s power to amend its judgments to rectify drafting mistakes.

Issues considered

Whether a judgment can be amended to correct an inadvertent omission of a substantive clause.
Whether such amendment affects the parties' rights or the substantive outcome of the appeal.

Subjects

amendment of judgmentcorrection of clerical errorcivil appealSupreme Court of Indiaprocedural law

Judgment

                        [2014] 3 S.C.R. 780


A    KESHARBAI @ PUSHPABAI EKNATHRAO NALAWADE
                  (D) BY LRS. & ANR.
                                  v.
        TARABAI PRABHAKARRAO NALAWADE & ORS.
               (Civil Appeal No. 3867 of 2014)
B                          APRIL 4, 2014
        [SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND A.K.SIKRI, JJ.]

        JUDGMENT:
c
          Amendment in judgment - Held: Para 22 of judgment
    dated 14.3.2014 is amended to the effect that the judgment
    of trial court is confirmed on Issue No. Ill also and suit of
    plaintiffs stands dismissed.
D       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
    3867 of 2014.

        From the Judgment and Order dated 23.03.2009 of the
    High Court of Bombay at Aurngabad in FA No. 468 of 2004.
E
        Chandan Ramamurthi for the Appellants.

       Preshit Surshe (Mentioned By), Shivaji M. Jadhav, Naresh
    Kumar for the Respondents.

F       The following Order of the Court was delivered

                                 ORDER

       1. On 27th March, 2014, we had directed to delete the
  following words in paragraph 22 of the Judgment delivered on
G 14th March, 2014 in Civil Appeal No.3867 of 2014 [Arising out
  of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.27916 of 2009]:

         "and set aside the findings recorded by the trial court on
    Issue No.Ill."
H                                780
  KESHARBAI @ PUSHPABAI EKNATHRAO NALAWADE 781
 (D) BY LRS. v. TARABAI PRABHAKARRAO NALAWADE
    2. However, inadvertently, the following line in the said         A
paragraph is deleted:
       "The judgment of the Trial Court is confirmed on Issue No.
Ill also."

    3. Let the necessary amended be made and the amended              8
paragraph 22 of the said judgment will read as follows:

     "22. In view of the aforesaid, we allow the appeal. The
judgment of the Trial Court is confirmed on Issue No. Ill also.
Consequently, the suit filed by the plaintiffs (respondents herein)   C
shall stand dismissed."

R.P.                                         Judgment modified.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "amendment of judgment"Sign in to search