9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Gupta, Adv. Ms. Deepti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Shivang Rawat, Adv. Ms. Amrita Kumari, Adv. For the Respondent : None ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the appeal papers. 3. The respondent, though served, has not chosen to appear and have his say in the instant proceedings. 4. From a perusal of the record, it is noted that the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing taken note of the said application for amendment, has through her Order dated 13.07.2018, arrived at the conclusion that the amendment, as sought for, would not be justified inasmuch as the said date, which is now sought to be corrected, has already been recorded in the evidence during cross-examination and also the relevant documents contain the same. The respondent, claiming to be aggrieved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 to 22.07.2012 as also changing the date in the evidence recorded by the complainant to the same effect. It is in that light, at the first instance, the learned Magistrate considering the application has rightly concluded that even if the amendment/ correction is permitted in the complaint to indicate the date as 22.07.2012, the evidence supporting the case of the appellant contains the year as 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence recorded is also to the same effect. 8. Therefore, the opinion reached by the High Court to arrive at the conclusion that the mistake could be committed while taking copies from the computer would not be justified in the facts of the present case where the legal notice had indicated the date, and based on the same, the complaint had been initiated. 9. In a matter of the present nature, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
