Chakarapani @ Viji v. The Deputy Registrar,

P.T.ASHA, J., This case is listed today under the caption 'for being mentioned' at the instance of Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent-Society.

2. The learned counsel for second respondent would submit that he has entered caveat for R2 and that he was very much present in the Court on 04.07.2025 and made his submissions.

3. This Court, by order dated 04.7.2025, had allowed the above revision. However in the order copy, the appearance of R2 was not marked and even in paragraph No.21, in the first line, instead of Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy for R2, it was wrongly represented as Mr.D.Gopal, Government Advocate. Hence, he seeks necessary correction in the order copy.

4. It appears that by oversight, the Registry has failed to mark the presence of the advocate for R2. Hence, Registry is directed to print the name of Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy for R2 against the column 'For 1/3

Respondent 2' and also in paragraph No.21, in the first line, in place of 'Mr.D.Gopal, Government Advocate' it should be replaced with 'Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy for R2'.

5. Registry is directed to incorporate the above changes and issue fresh order copy.

07.08.2025 ds 2/3

P.T.ASHA.J., ds 07.08.2025 3/3