# copy in which a person was shown as the son of his grandfather

- **Citation:** C.L.No. 56
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1963-09-24
- **Case number:** C.L.No. 56
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/copy-in-which-a-person-was-shown-as-the-son-of-his-grandfather-162733
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

17
In one case it was discovered that a pedigree was not correctly copied out in a certified
copy in which a person was shown as the son of his grandfather.

Incorrect and undecipherable copies have to be sent back to the court concerned
for correction. This entails unnecessary correspondence and impedes the progress of
cases in which they have been filed in the High Court. A little vigilance and effort on the
part of District Judges and on the part of the officer-in-charge of the Copying Department
is sure to lead to better and desirable results.

District Judges should take more interest in the matter and issue necessary
instructions to the officer-in-charge of the Copying Department and the head copyist to
ensure that incorrect and undecipherable copies, faint copies and copies prepared on worn
out and used paper are no longer allowed to issue from their office. One way of detecting
mistakes and carelessness on the part of copyists is for the officer-in-charge of the
Copying Department to send for some copies prepared by the department at random and
to punish the copyists who prepared them and examined them if they contain any
mistakes or have been illegibly and faintly prepared. If, after due and sufficient warning,
the examiner or the copyist does not improve he should be reduced or even removed from
service on the ground of inefficiency.

Whenever a copy is sent back for correction, not only should the mistakes be
rectified, but the explanation of the copyist or the examiner called for and suitable
departmental action taken against him. In all such cases, a report on the action taken by
the District Judge and the punishment awarded to the persons at fault should invariably
accompany the letter returning the copy after correction. The Court trusts that District
Judges and officers-in-charge of Copying Department would take personal interest in
eradicating this evil which is apparently on the increase and that it will no longer be
necessary in further to issue any instructions in this behalf.
C.L.No. 56 dated 24th September, 1963
In spite of detailed and repeated instructions incorrect and undecipherable copies
are being issued. This can be ascribed only to lack of appreciation of the object for which
these copies are filed and lack of interest on the part of the officers concerned. The
instructions issued must be carefully and strictly followed. There should be regular
checking by the officer-in-charge, who should maintain a record of such checking so that
action may be taken against habitual defaulters.
C.L.No. 58/VIIIb-58-Admn.'G' dated 22nd September, 1982
Hence forth Photostat certified copies of the illegible hand written orders should
not be issued by the subordinate courts.
C.L.No. 80/Ve-65 dated 2nd November, 1985
Incorrect and illegible copies of the lower court judgments cause much difficulty
in deciding cases and also cause delay in the disposal.

District Judges should take personal interest in the matter and issue necessary
instructions to the Officer-in-charge of the Copying Department and to the Head Copyist
in this behalf so that such tendency be curbed. The instructions already issued in the
matter should strictly be observed in future.
18
District Judges are directed to see, that no illegible copies of the lower court
judgments are issued from the Copying Department in future. The Court will take serious
view of the matter if illegible and undecipherable copies of the lower court judgments are
again issued from the Copying Departments of the subordinate courts.
C.L.No. 41/Ve-65 dated 6th May, 1957 and
C.L.No.21/Ve-65 dated 31st January, 1975
It is the duty of the District Judge and the officer-in-charge of the Copying
Department to ensure that legible and accurate copies are issued. When they inspect the
Copying Department they must examine some of the copies that are ready and take
severe action if they have been prepared in contravention of the instructions issued by the
Court.
C.L.No. 5/Ve-65 dated 19th January, 1970

Officers incharge of the Copying Departments should see to the strict compliance
of the Court's instructions contained in the General and Circular Letters noted below and
every week should pick up some ready copies at random, examine them and report
invariably to the District Judge the result of such examination:
1.
C.L.No. 59 dated 22-9-1950
2.
C.L.No. 95 dated 27-9-1951
3.
C.L.No. 84 dated 06-8-1952
4.
C.L.No. 62 dated 1-11-1955
5.
C.L.No. 41/Ve-55, dated 6-5-1957
6.
C.L.No. 109 dated 06-12-1951
7.
C.L.No. 59 dated 15-10-1960
8.
C.L.No. 56 dated 24-9-1963
G.L. .No. 29/86-9 dated 14th November, 1944
Whenever possible both sides of folios should be used in preparing copies of
documents in civil courts.
C.L.No. 105/VIII-b-85 dated 8th October, 1969

As recommended in paragraph 39 of the Report on the Re-organization and
Rationalization of the Civil Courts copy folio supplied with application for copies should
invariably be fully utilized for preparing copies.
C.L.No. 23/Ve.65/Admn. (D) dated 7th April, 1981
Certified copies issued by the subordinate court are sometimes prepared on rice
paper on both the sides and that too with a carbon paper which has outlived its utility,
with the result that such copies are not decipherable.

The District Judges are requested to see that the certified copies issued in future
are free from the above defects and are neat, clean and decipherable.
C.L.No. 53/Budget dated 25th August, 1983
The District Judges should ensure that copies prepared in good handwriting are
issued and that the copies are prepared on durable paper and not on unused forms, so as