https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313924 A finally determined insolvency order fixing the amount of debt could not be reopened by a later application once review had been refused and the Court had become functus officio. The Court held that a fresh request to alter the settled debt was not maintainable because the earlier adjudication was final on the merits. It also held that the clerical amendment power under the provision corresponding to Section 152 CPC was unavailable, since the alleged error was not a misrecording by the Court but a substantive mistake attributable to the creditor. The settled amount therefore could not be altered through amendment, and the challenge failed. en-us Wed, 07 May 1919 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 May 2024 14:11:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313924 A finally determined insolvency order fixing the amount of debt could not be reopened by a later application once review had been refused and the Court had become functus officio. The Court held that a fresh request to alter the settled debt was not maintainable because the earlier adjudication was final on the merits. It also held that the clerical amendment power under the provision corresponding to Section 152 CPC was unavailable, since the alleged error was not a misrecording by the Court but a substantive mistake attributable to the creditor. The settled amount therefore could not be altered through amendment, and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 07 May 1919 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313924