SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(SC) 1514

DIPAK MISRA, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Subramanium Prasad, G. Umapathy, C. Paramasivam, B. Balaji.
For the Respondents: Fali S. Nariman, V.N. Raghupathy.

ORDER :

1. On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board.

2. Heard Mr. Subramanium Prasad, learned senior counsel for the applicant and Mr. Fali S. Nariman, learned senior counsel for the respondent.

3. Mr. Prasad, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant submits that in the order dated 5th September, 2016, at page No. 5 in paragraph No. 1 and sub-para (c) of paragraph No. 2, a typographical error has occurred. It is submitted by him that instead of 10 cusecs and 20 cusecs in paragraph 1 and 15 cusecs in sub-paragraph (c), it has to be read as 10000 cusecs, 20000 cusecs and 15000 cusecs respectively.

4. Mr. Fali S. Nariman, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Karnataka does not dispute the said position.

5. Let 10 cusecs and 20 cusecs in paragraph 1 and 15 cusecs in sub-paragraph (c) at page No. 5, be read as 10000 cusecs, 20000 cusecs and 15000 cusecs respectively.

6. Let the order dated 5th September, 2016, be corrected and read accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top