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…!
Summary: Mistakes in affidavits, especially clerical or inadvertent errors, can typically be cured if identified and rectified promptly within the procedural framework and under judicial discretion. Deliberate or significant errors are not curable, and failure to act timely may result in the loss of rights or rejection of correction requests.
Discovering a mistake in an affidavit after filing can be alarming for any litigant. The common query, mistake in affidavit how to cure, arises frequently in civil proceedings. Fortunately, Indian courts provide mechanisms to address such issues, primarily through their inherent powers under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). This post explores the legal framework, procedures, and limitations for correcting affidavit errors, drawing from established precedents. Note that this is general information and not specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
A mistake in an affidavit can generally be rectified using the court's inherent powers, but only if the error is bona fide, clerical, or a patent mistake, and not fundamental or deliberate. Corrections are typically allowed under Sections 151 and 152 of the CPC, subject to conditions that prevent abuse or prejudice to other parties. Niyamat Ali Molla VS Sonargon Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. - 2007 7 Supreme 687Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
Section 152 CPC empowers courts to correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees, or orders arising from any accidental slip or omission. Courts extend this to affidavits to ensure justice and maintain record integrity. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
The Supreme Court has stressed that errors in affidavits, if bona fide and clerical, can be corrected, especially when the mistake is inadvertent and does not impact the substantive rights. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217J & K Housing Board VS Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Kaul - 2011 0 Supreme(SC) 1051
Under Section 151 CPC, courts wield inherent powers to make orders necessary for justice ends, including rectifying clerical errors in affidavits to prevent injustice. For example, The inherent powers of the court include correcting clerical or accidental slip errors in judgments, decrees, or orders. Niyamat Ali Molla VS Sonargon Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. - 2007 7 Supreme 687
Section 152 explicitly targets clerical or arithmetical mistakes arising from accidental slips or omissions. This applies to affidavits as part of judicial records. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
Correctable mistakes are limited to:- Clerical or typographical (e.g., typos, wrong figures). Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217- Accidental slips not altering substance. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
Fundamental errors—like incorrect material facts or deliberate falsehoods—do not qualify. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
Courts permit this to prevent injustice caused by inadvertent errors and to uphold the integrity of judicial records. Niyamat Ali Molla VS Sonargon Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. - 2007 7 Supreme 687
Not all errors are curable:- Deliberate or Substantive: No relief; seek review or rectification suit instead. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217- Party's Fault: Negligence-based mistakes generally excluded. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217- Prejudice to Others: If it harms the opposing party or changes rights, denied. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
For instance, in election petitions, mandatory defects like non-joinder under Section 82(a) of the Representation of the People Act aren't cured by later affidavits: filled at an earlier stage to the same effect but I cannot see how that cure the defect in the petition which had to be presented within a specified period. BABU VS BHAURAO - 1966 Supreme(Del) 97
Similarly, deliberate misstatements in applications (e.g., reservation claims) post-publication are incurable: It is not a question of wrongly marking the bubbles nor is it an inadvertent mistake. A deliberate statement... SHAIJI CHERUKKATTIL Vs KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ANR. - 2010 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34726SHAIJI CHERUKKATTIL VS K. P. S. C. - 2010 Supreme(Ker) 805
In execution proceedings, decree holders can't unilaterally fix survey errors: The error in the decree is to be cured by judicial intervention and not by the decree holder at his will. R. Venkatachalam VS Tmt. Kullammal - 2017 Supreme(Mad) 321
These cases illustrate that while clerical affidavit slips may be fixed, procedural or substantive lapses often lead to dismissal. SHASHI SHRIVASTAVA VS JAGDISHSINGH KUSHWAH - 2008 Supreme(MP) 869
High Courts and the Supreme Court allow post-swearing corrections for inadvertent affidavit errors if they don't alter core facts, avoiding multiplicity of proceedings. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217J & K Housing Board VS Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Kaul - 2011 0 Supreme(SC) 1051
Contrastingly, in PSC selections, no post-list corrections for deliberate errors: The applicant who made the defective application cannot have any right to seek consideration of his defective application or to make further application to cure the defect. SHAIJI CHERUKKATTIL Vs KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ANR. - 2010 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34726
In nomination rejections, minor defects might be overlooked if not substantial, but opportunities to cure must be given: the Returning Officer neither provided any opportunity to the petitioner to cure the defect nor overlooked the mistake, which was not substantial in nature. CHANDRA NARAIN TRIPATHI @ CHANDU TRIPATHI VS KAPIL MUNI KARWARIYA - 2011 Supreme(All) 1340
Suits by wrong persons can be cured via Order 1 Rule 10, showing flexibility: If the plaint is presented by a wrong person... remedy is available under Order 1 Rule 10 to cure such defect. Ramesh Shriram Sule VS Dilipraj Niranjankumar Goenka - 2008 Supreme(Bom) 1627
In summary, curing a mistake in an affidavit is feasible under Sections 151 and 152 CPC if it's a genuine clerical or accidental slip, as affirmed: a mistake in an affidavit can be cured by filing a proper application under the court’s inherent powers... demonstrating that the error is bona fide, clerical, or accidental. Muthu Karuppan VS Parithi Ilamvazhuthi - 2011 3 Supreme 217
Key Takeaways:- Act swiftly with a detailed application.- Limit to non-substantive errors.- Respect limitations to avoid rejection.- Integrate lessons from diverse cases like elections and executions for broader understanding.
This approach ensures justice without compromising procedural integrity. Always seek professional advice tailored to your situation.
#AffidavitMistake, #CPC152, #LegalCorrection
. . filled at an earlier stage to the same effect but I cannot see how that cure the defect in the petition which had to be presented within a specified period and which when presented suffered from the infirmity mentioned before. ... ... ( 6 ) IT has been urged on behalf of the petitioners that-an application had been made before the order was passed by the Chief, Election Commissioner by petitioner No. 2 for being impleaded as a party and that even his affiidavit had been
Judgment :- ... (1) AFFIIDAVIT-OF-SERVICE filed in Court today be kept on records.
Here, I am of the considered view that the mistake was purely clerical in nature. ... [11] Counsel submits that this Court retains a discretionary power under O 41 r 4, O 1A, and O 2 r 1 (3) of the Rules to cure procedural ... We never allow a client to suffer for the mistake of his Counsel if we can possibly help it. We will always seek to rectify it as far as we can. We will correct it whenever we are able to do so without injustice to the other side..." [Emphasis Added]. ... (ii) Plaintiff'S Contentions [10] The learned counsel for t....
In my considered opinion, in the facts of this case that as soon as the mistake was brought into the notice of the complainant and he offered to cure the defect, he ought to have been permitted so that his remedy may not become barred by time, merely on this technical ground based on mistake. ... Parties are not to be punished or prevented from availing their rights on account of shear mistake committed on their part. To think about mistake can it be said a mistake of complainant alone....
( 2. ) THE only dispute, which requires to be decided by this Court is, that in these circumstance what will be the fate of such complaint which has been filed without signatures of the complainant and thereafter in Court, he offered to put his signatures and mentioned his willingness to cure
Where the ld CIT(A) is ceased of the same, he should have asked the assessee to cure the defect, however, we find that no show-cause has apparently been showed by the ld CIT(A) to cure the mistake so happened while filing the Form 35. ... to rectify the said mistake by taking timely action. ... 2.6 It was further submitted that the clerical mistake in incorrectly mentioning the section number in the memorandum of appeal is attributed to the Counsel of the assessee and for the mistake ....
They will not get opportunity to rectify any mistake in the application later. Candidates applying for different posts shall send each application in separate envelopes." ... In spite of that such candidates were allowed to cure the defects in the applications and their applications were considered. About 300 persons ranked above him in the list are the persons thus allowed to cure the defects in the application. ... But at the same time, this clause does not disable the P.S.C. to give all the candidates who have committed certain mistake....
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Sunil V.Mohammed, submitted that the mistake in the application could be permitted to be corrected and it is not a mistake which is incurable. The counsel relied on the decisions in Santhamma v. ... The applicant who made the defective application cannot have any right to seek consideration of his defective application or to make further application to cure the defect. ... It is not a question of wrongly marking the bubbles nor is it an inadvertent mistake. A deliberate statement,....
Mohammed, submitted that the mistake in the application could be permitted to be corrected and it is not a mistake which is incurable. The Counsel relied on the decisions in Santhamma v. ... The applicant who made the defective application cannot have any right to seek consideration of his defective application or to make further application to cure the defect. ... It is not a question of wrongly marking the bubbles nor is it an inadvertent mistake. A deliberate statement, as revealed from an answer given by her in the a....
He further submits that due to clerical mistake, since Form 3 could not be submitted by the petitioner but the same is curable defect and he may be permitted to cure the defect. ... Thus the respondent authorities have acted in an arbitrary and unfair manner and without giving any opportunity to cure the defect which is a curable defect and have rejected the bid of the petitioner and deprived from the lawful opportunity to cure the defect and as soon as he was informed about ... Despite having opportunity the ....
There is no error in such submission, but who has to cure the defect and how it has to be corrected is the real point for consideration. 8. Secondly, it is contended that the wrong mentioning of survey number is curable defect and it can be corrected at any time. The error in the decree is to be cured by judicial intervention and not by the decree holder at his will.
The State has also power to make any rule to cure the mistake pointed by the Court. The State, while exercising its powers, has framed the rule notified vide Notification dated 11.09.2011. He further submitted that there is no constitutional sanctity to catch up rule i.e. regaining seniority rule. The State has power to make rules prospectively and retrospectively both under Article 309 of the Constitution of India.
But the Returning Officer neither provided any opportunity to the petitioner to cure the defect nor overlooked the mistake, which was not substantial in nature. The petitioner has stated in para 69 of the election petition that he had annexed first page of extract of electoral roll of Part No. 275 alongwith the relevant extract of Part No. 276 of the Electoral Roll alongwith his representation dated 6.4.2009 and requested the Returning Officer either to permit him to remove the defect or to correct the same. Para 69 of the election petition is reproduced as follows :
If the plaint is presented by a wrong person, it cannot be said that the suit was barred by any law or the Court was prevented from taking cognizance of such a suit. In fact, remedy is available under Order 1 Rule 10 to cure such defect.
That however does not appear to be the basis on which the surrender has been insisted upon. The surrender could perhaps be justified on the ground that the existing facilities are insufficient for the full intake of 40 students per annum. For the same reason, it is doubtful whether the surrender of 50% of NRI seats is justifiable on any reasonable basis if the surrender is meant only to offset the admissions made between 1992 and 96. As to how could any reduction cure the irregularity in the admissions made during the said period is difficult to appreciate.
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
