Typographical correction confined quashing to the challenged appellate order while preserving condonation of delay.

A typographical error in an earlier order was corrected so the operative relief matched the intended challenge: only the appellate order was quashed, and the delay in filing the appeal was condoned. The amendment substituted the relevant paragraph to remove reference to any additional order, thereby aligning the final directions with the relief actually sought and preserving the condonation already recorded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the earlier order required modification so that only the appellate order dated 23.12.2025 was quashed and the delay in filing the appeal was condoned.

Analysis: The application pointed out a bona fide typographical error in the earlier order, which had inadvertently referred to quashing an additional order beyond the appellate order challenged before the Court. The correction was sought to align the operative part of the order with the intended relief and to preserve the quashing of the appellate order while also recording condonation of the delay in filing the appeal.

Conclusion: The application was allowed and para 5 of the earlier order was substituted so that the appellate order alone stood quashed and the delay in filing the appeal stood condoned.

---