2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 11347
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.S.Sanjay Gowda, J. L. Odedra, JJ
Comptroller And Auditor General Of India – Appellant
Versus
Lakshme Bonda – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13002 of 2025
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aishvarya
For the Respondents: Dhawan M Jayswal
The court maintains inherent power to rectify accidental omissions and clerical errors in judicial orders to ensure that the written record accurately reflects the actual proceedings and appearances of the counsel involved.
Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Correction of judicial order - Speaking to the minutes - Inadvertent omission - Where an advocate has assisted the Court, but their appearance is not recorded in the order due to inadvertence, the Court has the inherent power to rectify such clerical errors to ensure the record reflects the proceedings accurately.
Facts of the case:
An application was moved requesting to speak to the minutes of a previous order, alleging that the name of the counsel representing the respondent had been inadvertently omitted from the formal record despite said counsel having assisted the Court during the proceedings.
Findings of Court:
Upon review of the application and the records, the Court confirmed that an error had occurred in the recording of appearances and granted the corrective modification to ensure accuracy.
Issues: Whether the judicial order required correction to reflect the documented presence and participation of the counsel for the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: Courts possess the inherent jurisdiction to correct clerical or accidental omissions within their own orders to maintain the veracity and integrity of judicial records.
Result: The application for speaking to the minutes was allowed and the order was updated to reflect the appearance of the counsel.
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
By way of the note of speaking to minutes dated 13.04.2026, it is stated that through inadvertence, the name of learned Advocate Mr. Dhawan M. Jayswal appearing for the respondent is not reflected in the order dated 10.03.2026, though he had assisted the Court on that day.
The Court has perused the averments made in the note.
Before para 1 of the judgment dated 10.03.2026, the following sentence reads as follows:
“Heard learned Advocate Ms. Aishvarya for the petitioners and learned Advocate Mr. Dhawan M. Jayswal for the respondent.”
The note stands disposed of accordingly.
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
