Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Judgment in favor of the opponent - Main points and insights:
The judgment favors the opponent when the order passed does not comply with statutory requirements under Section 152 of BNSS. For instance, the order must be addressed to a specific person and issued based on proper report or evidence, as highlighted in ["Dr.Muthu vs The Executive Magistrate/Tahsildhar Manalmelkudi Manalmelkudi(Taluk) - Madras"] and ["muthu vs the executive magistrate/ ta - Madras"]. Orders issued in a vague manner or without following prescribed procedures are liable to be quashed.
Several sources emphasize that orders under Section 152 BNSS must be specific and based on proper proceedings. For example, ["Dr.Muthu vs The Executive Magistrate/Tahsildhar Manalmelkudi Manalmelkudi(Taluk) - Madras"] states, the order does not satisfy the statutory requirement under Section 152 of BNSS, and ["muthu vs the executive magistrate/ ta - Madras"] notes that the order passed by the first respondent is in order when it correctly addressed the specific person and followed proper procedures. Conversely, orders that are vague or issued without proper notice or evidence are set aside.
Courts have consistently held that procedural lapses, such as not giving an opportunity to the petitioner or issuing orders based on false complaints, result in the order being set aside in favor of the opponent. References include ["muthu vs the executive magistrate/ ta - Madras"] and ["Dr.Muthu vs The Executive Magistrate/Tahsildhar Manalmelkudi Manalmelkudi(Taluk) - Madras"], which discuss the importance of opportunity and proper evidence.
The power of correction under Section 152 CPC is primarily for rectifying clerical or accidental errors, not for revising substantive orders. This is clarified in ["MANIKKAN vs DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD - Kerala"] and ["Hans Raj vs Amrik Singh - Delhi"], which state that every such mistake does not permit its rectification in exercise of Court's inherent powers and that Section 152 is meant for correction of clerical errors, not substantive orders.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The dominant insight from the sources is that courts tend to rule in favor of the opponent when the order under Section 152 BNSS is found to be vague, issued without proper statutory compliance, or based on false or unverified complaints. Orders must be specific, based on proper reports or evidence, and follow due procedure.
The power under Section 152 is primarily for correcting clerical mistakes, not for revising substantive judgments or orders that do not meet procedural requirements. Failure to adhere to these principles leads to the order being set aside, thus favoring the opponent.
References:
In legal proceedings, parties often seek corrections to judgments or decrees after delivery. A common query arises: Please help me find the judgment in favor of the opponent in BNSS 152. This question highlights a critical limitation under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), akin to Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which governs corrections for clerical or arithmetical mistakes. Courts frequently side with the opponent (the party resisting correction) when requests exceed this narrow scope, protecting the finality of judgments.
This blog post delves into pivotal judicial findings, explaining why substantive changes are typically barred, and integrates insights from related precedents. Whether you're a litigant, lawyer, or curious reader, understanding these boundaries can guide your strategy.
Courts generally do not have the authority to correct omissions or errors that go to the merits of the case or involve substantive modifications of the decree or judgment, especially after the judgment has been confirmed or the case has been appealed.Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474
Corrections under Section 152 are strictly limited to clerical or arithmetical mistakes or accidental slips or omissions that do not alter the substantive rights or the core decision of the court.Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429 This principle ensures judicial finality while allowing minor fixes.
These rulings consistently favor the opponent by denying overreaching correction applications.
The power under Section 152 CPC (mirrored in BNSS contexts) is strictly limited to correcting clerical or arithmetical mistakes or errors arising from accidental slips or omissions. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429 It does not extend to substantive errors, judgment modifications, or unawarded reliefs. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474
In one precedent, the court emphasized: amendments under Section 152 are for clerical or accidental slips and cannot be used to correct omissions that affect the merits of the case. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429
Once a judgment attains finality through confirmation or appeal, the trial court's jurisdiction under Section 152 is generally extinguished, unless the correction involves clerical or accidental errors. State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474 Substantive issues demand appeals or reviews. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429
Corrections which go to the merits of the case, such as granting reliefs not originally provided, are beyond scope. Proper remedies include appeals or review applications. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474
These cases underscore courts' reluctance to revisit merits via corrections, often ruling for opponents.
While core precedents limit corrections, other sources illustrate applications and boundaries:
In consumer disputes, Consumer Fora lack CPC Section 152 powers: However, we do not find any provision in Act, Rules and Regulations, which permit Consumer Fora to invoke power under Sections 151 and 152 of Civil Procedure Code... That cannot be a subject matter of Sections 151 and 152 specially, Section 152 of the C.P.C. Rushabh Enterprises through its Partners VS Anand Shamrao Gandre Fora are not civil courts, restricting CPC applicability.
Contrastingly, in land acquisition under Land Acquisition Act Section 53, a clerical omission in compensation consideration was correctable: omission of consideration of compensation regarding survey No. 467/1 in judgment merely clerical error which court was competant to correct under Sec. 152 of the Code. PARSHOTTAM RANCHHODBHAI TADPADA VS ACQUISITION OFFICER,kheda - 1994 Supreme(Guj) 75 Here, the court intervened as it was ministerial, not merits-based.
Civil courts retain inherent powers: S.152 'Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the Court...' Sharad Kapoor VS Mani Chopra - 2022 Supreme(J&K) 726 Corrections from pleadings are allowed if non-reviewing.
In BNSS criminal contexts, Section 152 involves conditional orders for disputes: Courts upheld urgent issuances without full reports to avert nuisances, but stressed procedure. K.M.YOUSEPH vs JOHN DEVASSY - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31829
Exceptions remain narrow: Only non-altering clerical fixes qualify. Substantive bids fail, favoring opponents.
For BNSS 152 disputes (e.g., land/water), timely procedural adherence is key, as delays risk law/order issues. SATHEESH D. vs REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 32555
In summary, judgments under BNSS/CPC Section 152 favor opponents by confining corrections to clerical/accidental errors, barring merits alterations post-finality. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474 This upholds judicial stability.
Key Takeaways:- Clerical fixes: Yes, anytime.- Merits/relief changes: No, use appeals/reviews.- Post-appeal: Severely limited.
This post provides general insights based on precedents and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
References:1. Dwaraka Das VS State Of M. P. - 1999 1 Supreme 429 – Limits to clerical errors, no merits corrections.2. State Of Punjab VS Darshan Singh - 2003 7 Supreme 474 – Post-confirmation restrictions.3. Additional: Rushabh Enterprises through its Partners VS Anand Shamrao Gandre, PARSHOTTAM RANCHHODBHAI TADPADA VS ACQUISITION OFFICER,kheda - 1994 Supreme(Guj) 75, Sharad Kapoor VS Mani Chopra - 2022 Supreme(J&K) 726
#BNSS152, #CPCSection152, #LegalCorrections
On a reading of Exhibit-P3, it is noticed that the same is in the nature of a petition filed under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023. ... JUDGMENT BNSS , he stands in the position of a Sub Divisional Magistrate and the proceedings assume the character of a legal proceeding. ... When the 2nd respondent exercises the jurisdiction under Section 152 of Section 152 of , there are certain procedures that are required to be followe....
However, we do not find any provision in Act, Rules and Regulations, which permit Consumer Fora to invoke power under Sections 151 and 152 of Civil Procedure Code. ... That cannot be a subject matter of Sections 151 and 152 specially, Section 152 of the C.P.C. and from that angle also said order is not sustainable in law. What we find that the order which is under challenge is absolutely bad and not sustainable in law and requires to be set aside. ... What we find that within 5 days af....
Plaintiff sought particular prayer against Jdr no.2 for releasing the original documents in their favor. But because of some reason, the order regarding said prayer has not find place in the operation portion of the judgment and decree. ... But due to some reasons the said direction not find a place in the operation portion of the judgment and decree. The principle behind the section 152 is ‘actus curaie neminem gravbit’ i.e., no body shall be prejudiced by the act of the court. ... W....
The opponent society shall pay Rs. ... 152 of the Act and a Registrar, an appeal is provided against the observating formalities, it was necessary to Appeal No. 62 of 1994 to the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co operative Societies Pune at Pune under Section 152
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and to conduct an enquiry as to the cause of death of the deceased under Section 194 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita . ... Be that as it may, from Ext.P5, I find that the Revenue Divisional Officer has already issued notice to the petitioner as well as respondents 4 to 9. ... Going through the pleadings and after hearing the petitioner and the respondents, I also find that this is an issue which can give rise to law and order problems also. ... JUDGMENT Dated th....
On the said application, learned Government Pleader appearing for the opponent, made an endorsement that the opponent had no objection if the amendment was granted. ... "in view of the provisions of Sec. 53 of the Act, it becomes evident that the provisions of Sec. 152 of the Civil Procedure Code would be applicable to all the proceedings before the Court under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as there is nothing to indicate that the provisions of Sec. 152 of the Civil ... ... ( 4 ) ON receiving the copy of jud....
S.152 "Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the Court either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties." ... From fair reading of Sections 151 and 152 of Code of Civil Procedure in the light of interpretation put on these provisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the supra judgment, there is no doubt in my mind that both under sections 151 and 152 CPC, civil c....
Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that Section 152 of the BNSS makes it mandatory for the Sub Divisional Magistrate to either call for a report from the police or take evidence before passing a conditional order. ... Having held so, I find merit in the argument that a conditional order can be imposed only by following the procedure prescribed. In Section 154 extracted below; “154. ... Moreover, the order require the petitioner to close down his godown immediately, which is contrary to the scheme of the provisions dealing wit....
The main contention of the petitioner is that no opportunity was given to the petitioner after issuing notice to the petitioner under Section 152(1) of BNSS. ... Based on the false complaint the respondent issued notice on 28.01.2025 under Section 152(1) of BNSS and notice under Sections 326(C), and Section 270(Public Nuisance) and Section 279(Fouling Water of Public Spring or Reservoir) of BNSS Act . ... So far as the judgment relied on by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) i....
The main contention of the petitioner is that no opportunity was given to the petitioner after issuing notice to the petitioner under Section 152(1) of BNSS. ... Based on the false complaint the respondent issued notice on 28.01.2025 under Section 152(1) of BNSS and notice under Sections 326(C), and Section 270(Public Nuisance) and Section 279(Fouling Water of Public Spring or Reservoir) of BNSS Act . ... So far as the judgment relied on by the learned Governance Advocate is concerned....
4.7 As further submitted that, vide communication dated 19.07.2024, the petitioner has, who signs in Gujarati, in an english letter addressed to A.P. Singh, IOCL Divisional OfÏcer that he received an update that his IOCL application is rejected due to PAN card mismatch. It is further communicated that, it is purely a mistake of his Computer Operator and due to his mistake, his provisional selection should not be rejected. Hope you support in consider this for next step. REGARDS.” In response to the said communication, respondent herein vide e-mail communication dated 29.07.2024 informed ....
So please kindly help me and allow me to write next exams.” (W.P.No.24326 of 2020) I appeared for the second year MBBS examinations conducted in November, 2020 with Hall ticket Regd. The punishment mentioned in the memo will spoil my life. “I am Nuthalapati Mohith Sai Umesh Chandra, student of 3rd year MBBS in Katuri Medical College, Guntur.
Jageshwar went inside some other room of his house because these three accused persons and their one companion were exhorting "Today we will kill the bastard." Jageshwar asked for help "Please save me, else these persons will kill me."
I am mentally very disturbed so please suggest and help me in best & possible way. We have already sent him notice for the same but still, I did not get any response from him.
i told u na that he said hes neva gonna leave me ....n same here n wen 2 ppl want d same thing god cant deny it….ab ye tou even u can undrstnd that y m unable 2 talk 2 u....only coz of help of few lovin welwishers m able 2 get in touch with u tis way .....n if disclose taht m stil talkin 2 u...i’ll b cut off frm tis source also....” (Emphasis by us) 485. i told u na that he said hes neva gonna leave me ....n same here n wen 2 ppl want d same thing god cant deny it….ab ye tou even u can undrstnd that y m unable 2 talk 2 u....only coz of help of few lovin welwishers m able 2 get in touch with....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
