ORAL ORDER

1. Present note for speaking to minutes is filed stating that the captioned matter was listed for hearing before this Court, wherein this Court was pleased to pass order dated 26.02.2026. It is stated that due to inadvertence, the order mentions Section 164 of the amended Motor Vehicles Act, whereas the correct provision is Section 163A as amended vide notification dated 22.05.2018 and the same was annexed at Page 26 of the petition. It is further stated that as per proviso 2 of the amended Schedule, the correct amount of compensation is Rs.5,25,000/-, whereas the judgment mentions Rs.5,00,000/-.

2. The Court, upon perusal, has observed that what has been stated is correct and, therefore, no issue is made out, inasmuch as the original order has been passed on merits.

NEUTRAL CITATION

3. However, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Akhil Bhartvarshiya Marwari Agarwal Jatiya Kosh & Ors. Vs. Brijlal Tibrewal & Ors., reported in (2019) 2 SCC 684, a note for Speaking to Minutes is required to be entertained only for the limited purpose of correcting a typographical error or an error through oversight, which may have crept in while transcribing the original order. A note for Speaking to Minutes cannot be considered at par with an application for clarification/modification of an order.

4. If the petitioner wants to challenge the said order then he has to file appropriate proceeding before the appropriate Court.

5. In view of above facts, the note for Speaking to Minutes filed by the learned Advocate for the petitioner does not fall within the purview of “note for Speaking to Minutes”. Accordingly, present note for speaking to minutes is dismissed.