MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. V T LAKSHMIPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. This appeal has been filed by the Managing Director of Tamil Nadu Agro Industries Development Corporation Limited impugning an order dated 14.3.2008 passed by a learned Judge of the writ court. In the said order, the learned Judge of the writ court has directed the present appellant to pay an amount of Rs.10,06,665/- to the first respondent/writ petitioner by way of ex gratia payment, retrenchment compensation, earned leave reimbursement and gratuity payment. The said payment has been directed to be made on the basis of a memo of calculation which was filed by the writ petitioner.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant before us submits that no opportunity was given to the appellant to controvert the said calculation and a copy of the said memo was also not served on him.

(3.) IT is well settled when the facts recorded in a judgment of a court are disputed as incorrectly recorded, the proper procedure is not to file an appeal against the judgment, but to immediately file an affidavit before the Court which has made the alleged incorrect recording and bring the same to the notice of the same learned Judge till it is fresh in judicial mind. Please see the judgment of Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak, AIR 1982 SC 1249). The relevant passage at paragraph-4, page 1251, is extracted: -" Matters of judicial record are unquestionable. They are not open to doubt. Judges cannot be dragged into the arena. "Judgments cannot be treated as mere counters in the game of litigation" (Per Lord Atkinson in Somasundaram v. Subramanian, AIR 1926 PC 136). We are bound to accept the statement of the Judges recorded in their judgment, as to what transpired in court. We cannot allow the statement of the Judges to be contradicted by statements at the Bar or by affidavit and other evidence. If the Judges say in their judgment that something was done, said or admitted before them, that has to be the last word on the subject. The principle is well settled that statements of fact as to what transpired at the hearing, recorded in the judgment of the court, are conclusive of the facts so stated, and no one can contradict such statements by affidavit or other evidence. If a party thinks that the happenings in court have been wrongly recorded in a judgment, it is incumbent upon the party, while the matter is still fresh in the minds of the Judges, to call the attention of the very Judges, who have made the record to the fact that the statement made with regard to his conduct was a statement that had been made in error (Per Lord Buckmaster in Madhusudan v. Chandrabati, AIR 1917 PC 30). That is the only way to have the record corrected. If no such step is taken, the matter must necessarily end there.".