UMC TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LTD.versusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. M.A. NO. 175/2021 IN
- Citation
- 2021 INSC 54
- Decided
- 2 February 2021
- Disposal
- Case Allowed
Holding
The phrase “including an employee of the appellant” is deleted from paragraph 4 of the judgment dated 16.11.2020.
Summary
The Supreme Court entertained an application to correct a typographical error in its earlier judgment dated 16 November 2020 in the case of UMC Technologies Private Ltd. v. Food Corporation of India & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 3687 of 2020). The application sought deletion of the words “including an employee of the appellant” from paragraph 4 of that judgment. After hearing counsel, the Court held that the phrase was erroneous and could be removed without affecting the substantive outcome. Consequently, the Court ordered that the said words be deleted and that the rest of the judgment remain unchanged. The order was issued on 2 February 2021, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the phrase “including an employee of the appellant” in paragraph 4 constitutes a material typographical error warranting correction
- Whether the Supreme Court may amend its own judgment to delete the erroneous phrase
Subjects
Judgment
396 [2021]
SUPREME COURT 4 S.C.R. 396
REPORTS [2021] 4 S.C.R.
A UMC TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LTD.
v.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.
M.A. No. 175/2021
B In
(Civil Appeal No. 3687 of 2020)
FEBRUARY 02, 2021
[S. ABDUL NAZEER AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
C
Judgment/Order – Typographical error in the judgment –
Correction of – The words “including an employee of the appellant”
stand deleted from paragraph 4 of the judgment in UMC
Technologies Private Limited versus Food Corporation of India &
Anr. Civil Appeal No. 3687 of 2020, dated 16.11.2020 reported in
D [2020] 13 SCR 1175 – Rest of the order remain as it is – Application
allowed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : M.A. No. 175 of 2021
in Civil appeal no. 3687 of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.02.2019 of the High Court
E of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No. 2778 of 2019.
Sahil Tagotra, Subhro P. Mukherjee, Mohit Pandey, Advs. for
Appellant.
The Order of the Court was passed :
F ORDER
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we deem it
appropriate to allow the prayer made by the appellant/ applicant.
Accordingly, the Application is allowed.
The words “including an employee of the appellant” stand deleted
G from the paragraph 4 of the Judgment dated 16.11.2020. Rest of the
order to remain as it is.
Ankit Gyan Application allowed.
H
396
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.