Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court of India heard a miscellaneous application filed by Axis Bank Limited seeking clarification of a previous judgment. The application pertained to Civil Appeal No.2085 of 2022, where a judgment had been delivered on September 12, 2023. The applicant-appellant sought clarification regarding the terminology used in paragraph 20 of that judgment, specifically requesting that the word 'unsecured creditor' be corrected to read as 'secured creditor'. The court first condoned the delay in filing the application, acknowledging procedural requirements had been met. After hearing learned counsel for both parties, the court examined the substance of the request. The core legal issue was whether the terminology used in the original judgment accurately reflected the legal status of the creditor. The court determined that a correction was warranted to ensure the judgment properly reflected the intended meaning. The court ordered that the word 'unsecured creditor' in paragraph 20 of the September 12, 2023 judgment be read as 'secured creditor'. The correction was limited to this specific change, and the judgment was corrected only to that extent. The miscellaneous application was disposed of accordingly, with the court making this clarification to prevent any misinterpretation of the original judgment's intent regarding the creditor's status.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Judgment Correction - Typographical Error Clarification - Not mentioned - The applicant-appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification of the judgment dated 12.09.2023 in Civil Appeal No.2085 of 2022 regarding the term 'unsecured creditor' used in paragraph 20 - The court condoned the delay in filing and directed that the word 'unsecured creditor' be read as 'secured creditor', correcting the judgment to that extent only - Held that the correction was necessary to accurately reflect the legal status of the creditor as per the original judgment (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the word 'unsecured creditor' in paragraph 20 of the judgment dated 12.09.2023 in Civil Appeal No.2085 of 2022 should be corrected to 'secured creditor'
Final Decision
Delay condoned. The word 'unsecured creditor' referred to in paragraph 20 of the judgment be now read as 'secured creditor'. Judgment dated 12.09.2023 is corrected to the above extent only. Miscellaneous application is disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Judicial correction of typographical errors
- Clarification of judgment terminology
- Condonation of delay in filing applications
