LEGAL ISSUE: Correction of clerical error in a judgment. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court. Case Name: In Re: Vijay Kurle & Ors. Judgment Date: 21 March 2022
Date of the Judgment: 21 March 2022
Citation: Not Available
Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose
The Supreme Court of India addressed a clerical error in its judgment concerning contempt proceedings. This order clarifies a specific reference within the original judgment, ensuring accuracy and consistency in the court’s records. This correction was made through a Miscellaneous Application filed to rectify the error.
Case Background
The case involves a contempt petition, where a judgment was previously delivered on April 27, 2020. Subsequently, a need arose to correct a clerical error within that judgment. The Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2022 was filed to address this issue.
Timeline:
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 27 April 2020 | Original judgment delivered in the contempt petition. |
| 21 March 2022 | Order issued to correct the clerical error in the original judgment. |
Course of Proceedings
A Miscellaneous Application (M.A. No. 486 of 2022) was filed to correct a clerical error in the judgment delivered on April 27, 2020. The application was placed before the same bench that delivered the original judgment.
Legal Framework
The judgment refers to Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The relevant portion of the judgment states:
“…92) of Article 142(2) of Article 142.”
This was the portion that required correction.
Arguments
The applicant, through their counsel, argued that there was a clerical error in the judgment dated April 27, 2020. Specifically, the reference to “Article 142(2)” was incorrect. The applicant requested that the reference be corrected to “Article 142”.
| Submission | Sub-Submission |
|---|---|
| Correction of Clerical Error | The reference to “Article 142(2)” in the original judgment is incorrect and should be “Article 142”. |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court did not frame any specific issues, as the matter was regarding a clerical correction. The court’s focus was on whether the correction was necessary and justified.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Whether the reference to “Article 142(2)” was a clerical error? | Yes, it was a clerical error. | The Court agreed with the applicant that the reference should be to “Article 142” only. |
Authorities
The judgment does not cite any specific cases or books. The primary authority considered was Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
| Authority | Court | How it was used |
|---|---|---|
| Article 142 of the Constitution of India | Supreme Court of India | The court corrected the reference to Article 142 in the original judgment. |
Judgment
The Supreme Court allowed the Miscellaneous Application, correcting the clerical error in the judgment dated April 27, 2020. The correction replaces the incorrect reference to “Article 142(2)” with “Article 142”.
| Submission | Treatment by the Court |
|---|---|
| Correction of Clerical Error | The Court accepted the submission and corrected the error. |
| Authority | How it was viewed by the Court |
|---|---|
| Article 142* of the Constitution of India | The Court corrected the reference to Article 142 in the original judgment. |
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The court’s decision was primarily driven by the need to maintain accuracy in its records. The correction was a matter of ensuring that the judgment correctly reflected the intended reference to Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The court’s focus was on rectifying a clear clerical error to uphold the integrity of its judicial pronouncements.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of Records | 70% |
| Clerical Error Rectification | 30% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 20% |
| Law | 80% |
The court’s reasoning was straightforward. The original judgment incorrectly referred to “Article 142(2)”. The correct reference should have been to “Article 142”. The court rectified this error to maintain the accuracy of its records.
“In terms of the office report, the suggested corrigendum, as stated infra, be carried out in the judgment delivered on 27-04-2020:-“
“Page No.Para No. Line No. For May be read as 8 Para 7 cont.5th line from bottom of the page 92) of Article 142(2) of Article 142.”
There were no dissenting opinions as it was a matter of clerical correction.
Key Takeaways
- ✓ The Supreme Court corrected a clerical error in its judgment dated April 27, 2020.
- ✓ The error involved an incorrect reference to “Article 142(2)” which was corrected to “Article 142”.
- ✓ This correction ensures the accuracy and integrity of the court’s records.
Directions
The Court directed that the suggested corrigendum be carried out in the judgment delivered on 27-04-2020.
Development of Law
This judgment does not establish a new legal principle but reinforces the importance of accuracy in judicial records. The ratio decidendi is that clerical errors in judgments can and should be corrected to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s order in M.A. No. 486 of 2022 is a straightforward correction of a clerical error. The court addressed the incorrect reference to “Article 142(2)” by replacing it with “Article 142”. This ensures that the official record of the judgment is accurate and consistent with the court’s intention.
Category:
- Constitutional Law
- Article 142, Constitution of India
- Contempt of Court
- Clerical Error Correction
FAQ
Q: What was the error in the Supreme Court judgment?
A: The error was a clerical mistake where the judgment incorrectly referred to “Article 142(2)” instead of “Article 142” of the Constitution of India.
Q: Why did the Supreme Court correct this error?
A: The Supreme Court corrected the error to ensure the accuracy and integrity of its judicial records. This ensures that the judgment reflects the court’s intended reference.
Q: What is a Miscellaneous Application?
A: A Miscellaneous Application is a formal request made to a court to address issues or make corrections related to a case that has already been decided.
Q: What is Article 142 of the Constitution of India?
A: Article 142 of the Constitution of India grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.
Q: What is the significance of this correction?
A: The correction is significant because it ensures that all legal documents and judgments are accurate, which is crucial for the proper functioning of the legal system.
Source: Vijay Kurle & Ors.