https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791818 A miscellaneous application in a disposed civil appeal could not be used as a de facto review or to challenge the legal force of the digitally signed order, because only limited correction of accidental slips or clerical mistakes is permissible after disposal. The absence of a proper affidavit and the attempt to question the order's validity made the filing misconceived, so it was rejected as not maintainable. Differences between the oral dictation and the signed order were held not to be material, since the signed order remained the final operative expression and the pre-signature corrections did not alter the result. The signed order was therefore valid, binding, and enforceable, and no rehearing was required. en-us Tue, 12 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 May 2026 08:18:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791818 A miscellaneous application in a disposed civil appeal could not be used as a de facto review or to challenge the legal force of the digitally signed order, because only limited correction of accidental slips or clerical mistakes is permissible after disposal. The absence of a proper affidavit and the attempt to question the order's validity made the filing misconceived, so it was rejected as not maintainable. Differences between the oral dictation and the signed order were held not to be material, since the signed order remained the final operative expression and the pre-signature corrections did not alter the result. The signed order was therefore valid, binding, and enforceable, and no rehearing was required. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 12 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791818