Manohar Singh Chana v. Union Of India & ORS

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5714/2017 MANOHAR SINGH CHANA ..... Petitioner Through:

Petitioner in person.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Akshay Makhija, Adv. with Mr.Shivi Sanyam, Adv. for R-1 & 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 29.08.2017 C.M. No. 31369/2017 By this application, the petitioner seeks correction of typographical error in the order dated 11th July, 2017. He points out that he appeared in person and his appearance has not been recorded. He also points out that there is an error in para 2 of the said order inasmuch, as, in the second last line the period has been incorrectly mentioned as "between 1992-1996".

Counsel for the respondents does not oppose this application. However, he points out that appearance of Mr.Akshay Makhija was also not recorded in the order on behalf of respondent nos.1 & 2. The application is, accordingly, allowed. In the appearance, the name of the petitioner as appearing in person should be noted.

The name of counsel for the respondent nos.1 & 2 should be noted as Mr.Akshay Makhija. In part 2 of the second last line of the order, the period be noted as "between 1972 and 1976".

The application stands disposed of in the above terms. VIPIN SANGHI, J REKHA PALLI, J AUGUST 29, 2017/aa.r