Mr. Bangari attributed the discrepancy in the judgment copy to a clerical error, clarifying that it neither invalidated nor altered the court's findings and conclusions. He emphasized that the correction of this clerical error could be made upon the submission of a formal application by the concerned parties, citing Order 23 Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Handbook, which grants the court authority to rectify such errors.
Despite the clerical error, Mr. Bangari asserted that the court's judgment remains valid, dispelling any misconceptions and affirming the court's ability to rectify such errors as needed.

0 Comments