1. ENTRY OF JUDGMENT; CORRECTION OF CLERICAL ERROR. — Where a resolution suffers from a clerical error in that, instead of showing that the Court denied said petition for review, it shows that the Court denied petitioner’s "motion for reconsideration", the corresponding entry of judgment made in connection therewith should be corrected.

R E S O L U T I O N

On December 4, 1962, we dismissed the petition filed by Edilberto Chan for the review of the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. 00961-R on the ground that it was filed out of time. In our resolution of December 21 of the same year, we set aside the former resolution for the reason that it appeared from the certification issued by the First Deputy Clerk of the Court of Appeals that the date of entry of the final judgment rendered in CA-G.R. No. 00961-R, as far as petitioner Chan is concerned, was not August 22, 1962, as previously reported to this court, but September 6 of the same year, this showing that the petition for review was filed on time. However, after considering said petition, we found it to be without merit and resolved to deny the same. Our resolution of December 21, however, suffers from a clerical error in that, instead of showing that we denied the said petition for review, it shows that we denied petitioner’s "motion for reconsideration."

WHEREFORE, our resolution of December 21, 1962 and the corresponding entry of judgment made in connection therewith are hereby corrected.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.