Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 85 of 1986, decided on 26th January, 1986.

‑‑‑O. VI, R. 17‑‑Amendment of plaint‑‑All vendees were duly impleaded by plaintiff /pre‑emptor in pre‑emption suit, but name of one of vendees was wrongly described as 'Z' instead of 'S' in plaint‑‑Trial Court on application of plaintiff allowed correction of name of such vendee holding it only case of mis-description through clerical mistake and not of addition of new party‑‑Order of Trial Court was upheld in revision by District Court‑‑Error being merely clerical one, correction, thereof, by Courts, held, was not open to exception as same was not suffering from any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error.

Ejaz Baig Mirza for Petitioners.

Date of hearing: 26th January, 1986.

This Constitutional petition calls in question order of the trial Court and the revisional order of the learned Additional District Judge whereby name of one of the defendants has been corrected.

Muhammad Siddique plaintiff /respondent brought a suit for possession through pre‑emption against three defendants who are all sons of Rahim Bakhsh. Defendant No.3 whose correct name is Safdar Ali was wrongly described as Zafar Ali in the plaint. Plaintiff made an application seeking correction of the name of the said defendant. Learned trial Court by order, dated 13‑11‑1985 allowed the application holding that it was only a case of mis-description through clerical mistake and not of addition of a new party. Revision taken by defendants has been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, vide order, dated 6‑1‑1986. Learned Additional District Judge has maintained the order of the trial Court but added that 'the same shall stand subject to payment of costs of Rs.300 (three hundred)', as the respondent had sought the correction after considerable delay.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. View taken by the learned Courts below is not open to any exception. All the three vendees who are brothers inter se were duly imp leaded as defendants. No one was left out. Only the name of Safdar Ali vendee was written as Zafar Ali. This clearly was the result of clerical error which has been rightly corrected by the learned trial Court whose jurisdiction to make a necessary correction is not questioned. That being so, the impugned orders do not suffer from any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error. This petition has, therefore, no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.

H . B . T . Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.