Apparent Error - Law Dictionary Search Results
Home Dictionary Name: apparent errorApparent error
Apparent error, an apparent error means a patent mistake, an error which one could point out without any elaborate argument, Karam Chand Thapar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1976 SC 2101 (2107): (1976) 4 SCC 257 (263)....
Any mistake apparent from record
Any mistake apparent from record, cannot be defined scientifically, precisely or exhaustively and should be determined in the light of the fact and circum-stances of each case. It is well-settled that an error can be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record, if it is patent, manifest or self-evident. If one has to travel beyond the record to see whether the judgment or order is correct or not, the error cannot be described as an error apparent on the face of record, M. Ahammedkutty Haji v. Tahasildar Kozhikode, Kerala, (2005) 3 SCC 351.Means an error can be said to be an error apparent on the face of record, if it is patent, manifest or self-evident. If one has to travel beyond the record to see whether the judgment or order is correct or not, the error cannot be described as an error apparent, on the face of the record, M. Ahamadekutty Haji v. Tahsildar, (2005) 3 SCC 351 (359). [Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (7 of 1975), s. 15(1)]...
Mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record
Mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record, under Order 47, Rule 1, CPC a judgment may be open to review inter alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record. An error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record justifying the court to exercise its power of review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. In exercise of the jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC it is not permissible for an erroneous decision to be 'reheard and corrected'. A review petition, has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be 'an appeal in disguise', Parsion Devi v. Somitri Devi, (1997) 8 SCC 717 (719). (Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 47, Rule 1 and s. 114...
An error apparent on the face of the proceedings
An error apparent on the face of the proceedings, is an error which is based on clear ignorance or disregard of the provisions of law. Such error is an error which is patent error and not a mere wrong decision, Lily Thomas v. Union of India, (2006) 6 SCC 224; T.C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa, AIR 1954 SC 440....
Error apparent on the face of award
Error apparent on the face of award, an 'error on the face of an award' means that the Court must first find whether there is any legal proposition which is the basis of such an award. Where an award is challenged upon such a ground it is not permissible to read words into it or to draw inferences and the award or the order must be taken as it stands. (AIR 1923 PC 66 followed), Bharat Barrel & Drum Mfg. Co. v. L.K. Bose, AIR 1967 SC 361 (368): (1967) 1 SCR 739....
Error apparent on the face of the record
Error apparent on the face of the record, in the case of a reasoned award, the Court can interfere if the award is based upon a proposition of law which is unsound in law. The erroneous proposition of law must be established to have vitiated the decision. The error of law must appear from the award itself or from any document or note incorporated in it or appended to it. It is not permissible to travel beyond and consider material not incorporated in or appended to the award, Trustees of the Part of Madras v. Engg. Constructions Corp. Ltd. [Arbitration Act, 1940, s. 30(c) and 16(1)(c)]...
Mistake apparent on the record
Mistake apparent on the record, A 'mistake apparent on the record' must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may conceivably be two opinions. A decision on a debatable point of law is not a mistake apparent from the record. The power of the officers mentioned in s. 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to correct 'any mistake apparent from the record' is undoubtedly not more than of the High Court to entertain a writ petition on the basis of an 'error apparent on the face of the record', T.S. Balram, Income Tax Officer v. M/s. Volkart Brothers, AIR 1971 SC 2204 (2206): (1971) 2 SCC 526: (1972) 1 SCR 30. (Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 154)(ii) For finding out whether there is a mistake apparent on the record, the authority has to look to the amended law and not to the law that was in force at the time the original order was made, Commercial Tax Officer v. Shri Venkateswara Oil Mills, AIR 1973 SC 13...
Clerical or arithmetical error
Clerical or arithmetical error, A clerical or arithmetical error is an error occasioned by an accidental slip or omission of the court. It represents that which the the court never intended to say. It is an error apparent on the face of the record and does not depend for its discovery on argument or disputation. An arithmetical error is a mistake of calculation, and a clerical error is a mistake in writing or typing, Sooraj Devi v. Pyare Lal, (1981) 2 SCR 485: (1981) 1 SCC 500: AIR 1981 SC 736 (738). [Criminal Procedure Code (2 of 1974) s. 362]...
Patent error
Patent error, a patent error is an error which is self-evident, i.e., which can be perceived or demonstrated without involving into any lengthy or complicated argument or a long-drawn process of reasoning. Where two inferences are reasonably possible and the subordinate court has chosen to take one view the error cannot be called gross or patent, Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, AIR 2003 SC 3044 (3056): (2003) 6 SCC 675; see also Ranjeet Singh v. Ravi Prakash, (2004) 3 SCC 682.Means apparent mistakes; such errors can be seen on the face of an instrument, Dictionary of Constitutional and Parliamentary Terms, Lok Sabha Secretariat, 2nd Edn., 2005, p. 322....
Mistake apparent from the record
Mistake apparent from the record, s. 35(1) of the Act refers not only to the order of assessment but it comprises all proceedings on which the assessment order is based and the Income-tax Officer is entitled for the purpose of exercising his jurisdiction under s. 35 to look into the whole evidence and the law applicable to ascertain whether there was an error, Maharana Mills (P) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, AIR 1959 SC 881 (886): (1959) Supp 2 SCR 547. [Income-tax Act, 1922, s. 35 (1)]...
- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial