Mistake - Law Dictionary Search Results
Home Dictionary Name: mistake Page: 2Mistake 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)]...
Mistaker
One who mistakes...
Idem sonans
Idem sonans (sounding alike). A wrong or unsuit-able name. The courts will not set aside proceed-ings on account of the mispronunciation or mistake of names sounding alike, unless substantial in-justice has been done. See Reg. v. Mellor, (1858) 27 LJQB 121, where on a trial for murder it was discovered after conviction that Joseph Henry Thorne and William Thorniley, having both been on the panel, William Thorniley had by mistake answered to the name of Joseph Henry Thorne, and been sworn. Seven judges to six held that the conviction ought not to be set aside, two of them only on the ground of want of jurisdiction in the Court for Crown Cases Reserved (see CROWN CASES RESERVED); and see also Wells v. Cooper, (1874) 30 LT 721, where in an action of trespass Thomas Cox, a special juror, served by mistake for Thomas Fox on a common jury. And see MISNOMER....
Ignorantia facti excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat
Ignorantia facti excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat. (Ignorance of the fact excuses; ignorance of the law excuses not.) The maxim is often cited simply as Ignorantia legis [or juris] neminem excusat. Therefore, first, money paid with full knowledge of the facts, but through ignorance of the law, is not recoverable if there be nothing against conscience in retaining it; and, secondly, money paid in ignor-ance of the facts is recoverable, provided there have been no laches in the party paying it. See MISTAKE. In criminal cases this maxim applies, as if a man should think he has a right to kill a person excommunicated or outlawed wherever he meets him and does so, this is murder. But a mistake of fact is an excuse, as where a man, intending to kill a thief or house-breaker in his own house, by mistake kills one of his own family, this is no criminal action; see 4 Bl. Com 27. Consult Broom's Leg. Max....
Free consent
Free consent, defined, Consent is said to be free when it is not caused by--(1) coercion, as defined in s. 15, or(2) undue influence, as defined in s. 16, or(3) fraud, as defined in s. 17, or(4) misrepresentation, as defined in s. 18, or(5) mistake, subject to the provisions of ss. 20, 21 and 22.Consent is said to be caused when it would not have been given but for the existence of such coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. [Contract Act, (9 of 1872), s. 14]...
Misnomer
Misnomer, a wrong name. Nil facit error nominis cum de corpore vel persona constat. 11 Rep. 21.--(A mistake in the name does not matter when there is no mistake in the body or person.)Misnomers in civil proceedings are curable under R.S.C. 1883, Ord. XXVIII., and misnomers in criminal pleadings by 7Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 19.As to misnomer of a juror, see Reg. v. Mellor, (1858) Dears. & B. 468...
Stare decisis
Stare decisis, to abide by authorities or cases already adjudicated upon.The doctrine of precedent , under which it is necess-ary for a court to follow earlier judicial decisions when some points arise again in litigation, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 1414.Stare decisis is a well-known doctrine in legal jurisprudence. The doctrine of stare decisis, meaning to stand by decided cases, rests upon the principle that law by which men are governed should be fixed, definite and known, and that, when the law is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction authorised to construe it, such declaration, in absence of palpable mistake or error, is itself evidence of the law until changed by competent authority. It requires that rules of law when clearly announced and established by a court of last resort should not be lightly disregarded and set aside but should be adhered to and followed. What it precludes is that where a principle of law has become established by a series of decisions, i...
Error nominis
Error nominis, a mistake of detail in the name of a person; used in contradistinction to error de persona, a mistake as to identity. See Reg. v. Mellor, (1858) Dears & B 468....
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]...
Actus curiae neminem gravabit.
Actus curiae neminem gravabit. Jenk. Cent. 119.--(An act of the Court will hurt no person) See Broom's Leg. Max., citing Cumber v. Wane, (1719) 1 Str. 126; 1 Smith L. C., in which it was held that if one party to an action die during a curia advisari vult, judgment maybe entered nunc pro tunc--a principle recently applied in Ecroyd v. Coulthard, (1897) 2 Ch 554: (1898) 2 Ch 358.No act of Court should harm a litigant and it is the bounden duty of Courts to see that if a person is harmed by a mistake of the Court he should be restored to the position he would have occupied but for that mistake, Jang Singh v. Brij Lal, (1964) 2 SCR 145, (para 16); See Also CIT v. B. N. Bhattacharjee, (1979) 4 SCC 121: AIR 1979 SC 1725; Raj Kumar Dey v. Taropado Dey, (1987) 4 SCC 398; AIR 1987 SC 2195, Nand Kishore Morwah v. Samundri Devi, (1987) 4 SCC 382: AIR 1987 SC 2284, Atama Ram Mital v. Ishwar Singh, (1988) 4 SCC 284: AIR 1988 SC 2031; Mithilesh Kumari v. Prem Behari Khare, (1989) 2 SCC 95: AIR 1989...
- << Prev.
- Next >>