S K SHANMUGHAM Vs. DARIVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner/Plaintiff has filed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 05.01.2010 in I.A.No.1737 of 2004 in O.S.No.2717 of 2000 passed by the Learned Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore.

(2.) THE Learned Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore, while passing orders in I.A.No.1737 of 2004 on 05.01.2010, has, among other things, observed that '.. It is not the case of the Petitioner (Plaintiff) that in Door No.4/188, the S.F.No.158/4 is situated, when there is a specific case of both sides, the evidence was let in. Now, the Petitioner/Plaintiff cannot plead that it is typographical error etc.' and resultantly, dismissed the application without costs.

(3.) LASTLY, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Plaintiff submits that the identity of the suit is not in dispute and it is clear and only the survey number where it is situated has been wrongly typed in the pleadings and in law, a Court of Law has the discretionary power to amend the typographical error at any time [including at the time of closure of evidence or part heard stage of the hearing of the suit].