9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 672 - AT - Central ExciseRectification of Mistake - typographical error in the cause title - Held that - The mistake is purely typographical error which can be corrected by the successor to the office since the application for Rectification of Mistake is filed within the stipulated period of six months - The cause title is accordingly amended with inclusion of names Dawood & Co, Samurai Footwear Pvt. Ltd., Sadruddin Daya, Shauheen Daya as respondent no. 2, 3, 4 and 5 and at page 2 of the final order under Sr. No. 6, and others be affixed after Dawood Shoes Pvt. Ltd. - the Rectification of Mistake petition is allowed.
Issues Involved: Rectification of Mistake application seeking addition of names of respondents in the cause title and order.
The judgment deals with a Rectification of Mistake application seeking to add names of four respondents in the cause title and order passed by previous judges who vacated the bench due to transfers. The appellant revenue department filed an appeal against multiple entities but only one name was reflected in the cause title and order. The applicant-respondent argued that the names of all respondents were not included in the final order, presenting evidence to support their claim. The appellate tribunal acknowledged the typographical error and allowed the Rectification of Mistake petition, amending the cause title to include all four respondents and making necessary corrections in the final order. The decision was based on the submission of the appellant's counsel and the acknowledgment of the error by the appellant's representative. The tribunal directed the Registry to communicate the amendments effectively. In summary, the judgment addressed the Rectification of Mistake application seeking to rectify the omission of names of respondents in the cause title and order. The tribunal allowed the application, amending the cause title to include all four respondents and making necessary corrections in the final order. The decision was based on the acknowledgment of a typographical error and the submission of the appellant's counsel.
|
