P.Velusamy v. The Chairman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.03.2025 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY P.Velusamy .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The Chairman, The State Legal Service Authority, A.D.R. Buildings, High Court, Chennai - 600 104.
2. The District Chairman, District Legal Services Authority, Combined Court Complex, Tiruppur.
3. S.Kalamani
4. P.Ramesh
5. D.Saranya
6. R.Sindhu
7. V.Senthil Nathan
8. J.Pushpa Latha
9. R.Deivathal
10. V.Radha .. Respondents 1/7
(RR-3 to 10 are impleaded as per order, dated 09.12.2024 in W.M.P.No.40226 of 2024 in W.P.No.34592 of 2024) Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to either amend, or permit to amend, the typographical errors in the compromise petition, so as to reflect the correct old Survey Field Number 'S.F.No.120/2A' instead of 'S.F.No.102/2A', in item - 1 and item - 2 properties of B schedule in Lok adalat case No.491 of 2021, on the file of the District Legal Services Authority, Tiruppur of O.S.No.305 of 2013 in the file of the learned 2nd Additional District Judge of Tiruppur. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Mayilasamy For Respondents : Mr.S.Arokia Maniraj, for RR-1 and 2 : Mr.A.Gowthem, for RR-4 to 7, 9 and 10 : R3-Notice served : R8-Tapal returned as no such 2/7
addressee
ORDER
This Writ Petition challenges the award of the Lok Adalat, dated 18.08.2021. As a matter of fact, there is no challenge to the award, but, the prayer is only to correct a typographical error. Since there is no specific enabling provision to approach the very same authority, the petitioner has come by way of this Writ Petition.
2. As a matter of fact, the subject matter of the B-schedule property is S.No.120/2A. At least, in one place in item No.1, in three places in item No.3 and in two places in item No.4, the same has been correctly mentioned as S.No.120/2A. However, there is a typographical error in the third sentence of the description in the item No.1, whereunder, the survey number is typed as '102/2A', instead of '120/2A'. Similarly, in the second sentence of item No.2 also, it is wrongly typed as '102/2A', instead of 120/2A'. 3/7
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a pure and simple typographical and there is no dispute with reference to identity of the property or the four boundaries therein. As a matter of fact, when the petitioner approached this Court, the other parties to the memo of compromise, are arrayed as the respondent Nos.3 to 10. Even though notices are served, they chose not to defend the proceedings and they are not appearing before this Court.
4. The learned Counsel would submit that in view of the innocuous mistake, nobody is interested in defending the matter.
5. In view thereof, this Writ Petition is disposed of on the following terms:- (i) The award of the Lok Adalat, dated 18.08.2021 passed in Lok Adalat Case No.491 of 2021 on the file of the District Legal Services Authority, Tiruppur in O.S.No.305 of 2013 on the file of the learned II 4/7
Additional District Judge, Tiruppur with reference to the memorandum of compromise that is filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure between the parties in internal page No.6 in B-schedule in item No.1 and in internal page No.7, in item No.2, shall read as '120/2A' instead of '102/2A;
(ii) There shall be no order as to costs.
05.03.2025 : no grs To
1. The Chairman, The State Legal Service Authority, A.D.R. Buildings, High Court, Chennai - 600 104.
2. The District Chairman, District Legal Services Authority, Combined Court Complex, Tiruppur.
3. The II Additional District Judge, Tiruppur.
5/7
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
grs 6/7
05.03.2025 7/7