Sumitha Paul v. No Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL A.Nos.156 of 2026 & 6353 of 2025 in OP No.685 of 2024
1. Mrs.Sumitha Paul W/o. Late S.Alaudhin, Mother of Minor A.Haroun Aldin, NO.2/169, Commissioner Colony, Puzhichalur, Chennai 600 074.
Applicant(s) Vs
1. No Respondent nil Respondent(s) A No. 156 of 2026
1. Sumitha Paul W/o. Late S.Alaudhin, Mother of Minor A.Haroun Aldin, NO.2/169, Commissioner Colony, Puzhichalur, Chennai 600 074.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. No Respondent Nil Respondent(s) 1/4
OP No. 685 of 2024
1. Sumitha Paul W/o. Late S.Alaudhin, Mother of Minor A.Haroun Aldin, NO.2/169, Commissioner Colony, Puzhichalur, Chennai 600 074.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. No Respondent Nil Respondent(s) A No. 6353 of 2025 PRAYER :To pass an order permitting the petitioner to amend the share amount of minor is mentioned schedule in the petitioner in O.P.No.685 of 2024 is Rs.7,70,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy Thousand only) instead of Rs.16,19,200/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Nineteen Thousand and Two Hundred only) A No. 156 of 2026 PRAYER :To pass an order permitting the petitioner to amend the share amount of minor is mentioned schedule in the petition in O.P.No.685 of 2024 is Rs.7,70.000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs Seventy Thousand only) instead of Rs.16,19.200/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Nineteen Thousand and Two Hundred only) consequently amendment in judgment and decree in O.P.No.685 of 2024 dated 21/02/2025. In both Applications :
For Applicant : Mr.K.Bommuraj COMMON ORDER Both applications have been filed by the applicant to permit the petitioner to amend the share of the minor child, mentioned in the schedule main petition as well as the decree.
2/4
2. According to the applicant, they filed the main petition to appoint a guardian and to grant permission to sell the share of the minor child.
3. Already this Court passed an order by allowing the application in the main petition. The share of the minor child have been wrongly mentioned as Rs.16,19,200/- instead of Rs.7,70,000/-. Therefore, those typographical errors have to be corrected. In this case, there is no respondent.
4. This Court already perused the records. It is observed that the above said corrections occurred due to typographical error. Therefore, the said typographical error has to be corrected.
5. Registry is directed to carry necessary amendment and issue fresh order copy.
6. Accordingly, these Applications are disposed of. 09.01.2026 mtl 3/4
P.DHANABAL, J.
mtl A.Nos.156 of 2026 & 6353 of 2025 in OP No.685 of 2024 09.01.2026 4/4