VASUDEVA PUBLICITY SERVICE Vs. MRF LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter is listed pursuant to office objection that the principal amount as stipulated in paragraphs 33 and 41 is different than the principal amount mentioned in other paragraphs.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel Mr.Ravi Kant Chaddha with Ms.Pooja Verma, Advocate for the plaintiffs and Ms.Surekha Raman, Advocate for the defendant are present.

(3.) Learned Senior counsel for the plaintiffs states that there appears to be typographical error in paragraphs 33 and 41 of the Judgment dated 2nd July, 2010 as the principal amount in the suit is Rs.58,43,756/- and not Rs.50,43,756/- as mentioned in paragraphs 33 and 41 of the Judgment dated 2nd July, 2010. It is contended that it is on account of typographical error. The learned counsel for the defendant also admits that there are typographical mistakes in paragraphs 33 and 41 of the Judgment regarding principal amount. Consequently, paragraphs 33 and 41 are modified so as to correct the typographical error in respect of the principal amount of the suit mentioned therein. After correction of the typographical error in paragraphs 33 and 41 of the Judgment dated 2nd July, 2010 shall read as under:- Therefore what is to be determined is whether the