JUDGMENT :

NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J.

1. Today the instant MCC has been filed for correction in paragraph 15 of the judgment dated 2-1-2023 passed by this Court in Second Appeal No. 448 of 2014 (Bashir Mohammed (Died) through LRs. and Others vs. Mohammed Saeed (Died) through LRs. and Others).

2. Perused the judgment passed by this court on 2-1-2023 in Second Appeal No 448 of 2014 wherein Para 15 reads as under:

“15. Learned trial court after appreciation of the evidence, material on record has recorded a finding that the plaintiff is unable to prove issue No. 1, 6 to 9 in negative against the plaintiff. Learned trial court while deciding issue No. 2 has recorded a finding that the plaintiff is unable to prove the fact that the suit property was purchased by his father in the name of Mohammad Sharif and while deciding issue No. 3, the trial court has recorded a finding that Mohammad Sharif was the owner of the suit property. While deciding issue No. 5 whether present suit is not maintainable because of res-judicata of Civil Suit No. 79A/72, the learned trial court has recorded a finding that both parties have given consent that principle of res-judicata is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case. Learned trial court has also recorded a finding that the application of Section 11 of CPC is the subject matter and the parties and competency of the court and finality of the judgment should exist, but in the present case, none of these facts is not available, therefore, principle of res-judicata is not applicable.”

3. In the last nine lines of the aforesaid Para 15 of the judgment there are some typographical errors which require to be corrected. Accordingly, the same is corrected which reads as under:

“15. Learned trial court after appreciation of the evidence, material on record has recorded a finding that the plaintiff is unable to prove issue No. 1, 6 to 9 in negative against the plaintiff. Learned trial court while deciding issue No. 2 has recorded a finding that the plaintiff is unable to prove the fact that the suit property was purchased by his father in the name of Mohammad Sharif and while deciding issue No. 3, the trial court has recorded a finding that Mohammad Sharif was the owner of the suit property. While deciding issue No. 5 whether present suit is not maintainable because of res-judicata of Civil Suit No. 79A/72, the learned trial court has recorded a finding that both parties have given consent that principle of res-judicata is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case. “Learned trial court has also recorded a finding that for application of Section 11 of CPC, the subject matter and the parties should be similar, competency of the court and finality of the judgment should exist, but in the present case, none of the facts is available, therefore, principle of res-judicata is not applicable.”

4. The rest of the judgment passed in Second Appeal No. 448 of 2014 on 2-1-2023 shall remain intact.

5. Accordingly, the instant MCC stands disposed of. A copy of this order be retained in the original file of Second Appeal No. 448 of 2014.

6. NIC is directed to delete the earlier uploaded judgment passed in Second Appeal No. 448 of 2014 on 2-1-2023 from the website and after deleting the same, they shall upload the judgment passed in Second Appeal No. 448 of 2014 decided on 2-1-2023 along with order dated 5-1-2023 passed in M.C.C. No 6 of 2023.

S.A. No. 448 of 2014

1. This is plaintiff’s second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 5-9-2014 passed by the First Additional Dis