IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI, J.
Babubhai Gokalbhai – Petitioner
Versus
The Deputy Collector – Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 12851 of 2020
Decided On : 27-04-2021
TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE - Land Reference Case - The court allowed the petition challenging the dismissal of an application for correction of a typographical error in the name of a claimant in a land reference case, emphasizing the importance of substance over technicalities in such matters.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioners challenged the dismissal of their application for correction of a typographical error in the name of a claimant in a land reference case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found substance in the arguments of the Petitioners and quashed the impugned order, allowing the petition.
Issues: Challenge to dismissal of application for correction of typographical error in land reference case.
Ratio Decidendi: Substance in the arguments and documents produced outweighed technical limitations, leading to the allowance of the petition.
Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed.
JUDGMENT :
ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI, J.
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. G.M. Amin for the Petitioners and learned AGP Mr. Jayneel Parikh for the Respondent-State of Gujarat at length on 31.3.2021 through video conference.
2. The Petitioners have filed this Petitioner under Articles 14, 19 and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 7.1.2020 below Exh.16 in Land Reference Case No. 138 of 1999 by the leanred Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the Petitioners' Application filed under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for correction of the name of Manubhai Kalabhai instead of Manubhai Gokalbhai in Land Reference Case No. 138 of 1999 at Exh.16.
3. The facts in nutshell are that the Petitioners are the joint owners and occupiers of the land bearing Survey No. 31/3/A situated at village Mangbapara, Taluka District Amreli which land was acquired for the purpose of Vadi Irrigation Project. The land Acquisition Officer had declared award on 14.5.1998 and offered the compensation at the rate of Rs.7/- per sq. Meter for Jirayat land and Rs. 10.50 paise per sq. Meter for Bagayat land. That through inadvertance on the title in the Reference Application, the name of one of the claimant inadvertantly mentioned as Manubhai Gokalbhai instead of Mabubhai Kalabhai. As the Advocate for the Petitioners have expired, the Petitioners have no knowledge of such typographical mistake. That at the time of withdrawal of compensation a query was raised by the learned trial court that there is a discrepancy in the name of Manubhai Gokalbhai whereas the purshis is signed by Manubhai Kalabhai. On inquiry it was found that there was a typographical mistake in the judgment of the Reference Court. Therefore, Application under Section 151 and 152 of CPC was filed for amendment of the name of the Petitioner-Manubhai Kalabhai. That despite the fact that the other side has not raised any objection, the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli has dismissed the application only on the ground of limitation that the petitioners have not filed application within the limitation period.
4. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent-State of Gujarat.
5. Learned Advocate for the Petitioners has submitted that there is a minor typographical mistakes and that is to the effect that real and correct name is Manubhai Kalabhai but due to typographical mistake, it is mentioned as Manubhai Gokalbhai. Learned Advocate Mr. Amin has also placed reliance upon different documens such as copy of 7/12 Form [Annexure-F] at page no. 81 of the memo of petition, copy of Section 9(1)(2) notice dated 16, 26/7/1996 [Annexure-E] at page no. 82 of the memo of petition, copy of death certificate [Annexure-F] at page no. 84 of the memo of petition and also the copy of pedigree [Annexure- G] at page no. 85 of the memo of petition and submitted that in all such documents the name of the claimant is mentioned as Manubhai Kalabhai. It is therefore submitted that the petition may be allowed and the impugned order dated 7.1.2020 below Exh.16 in Land Reference Case No. 138 of 1999 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli may be quashed and set aside.
6. Per contra learned AGP has opposed the petition and submitted that the petition may be dismissed as the First Appeal has already been filed.
7. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective sides, pursuant to the documents produced at Annexure-D, Annexure-E, Annexure-F and Annexure-G (as stated herein above) and also the proceedings in Land Reference Case wherein the name of the claimant is shown as Manubhai Kalabhai, this court is of the opinion that there is some substance in the arguments advanced by the learned Advocate for the Petitioners, and therefore, the petition deserves consideration. The impugned order dated 7.1.2020 below Exh.16 in Land Reference Case No. 138 of 1999 passed by the
Substance over technicalities in correction of typographical errors in legal documents.
Minor clerical errors in legal documents should not lead to unnecessary litigation or the requirement of succession certificates, as they can be corrected to ensure justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.