Vikas Kamalakar Walawalkar vs The Dy. Salt Commissioner And 2 Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 9078 Bom

                                                             6-nms2481-16c

vai

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION


                       NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2481 OF 2016
                                      IN
                             SUIT NO.1172 OF 2005

      The Deputy Salt Commissioner & Anr.                    ...Applicants

      IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

      Vikas Kamalakar Walawalkar                             ...Plaintiff
               V/s.
      The Deputy Salt Commissioner & Ors.                    ...Defendants

                                   WITH
                       CHAMBER SUMMNS NO.1801 OF 2016
                                     IN
                            SUIT NO.1172 OF 2005

      Vikas Kamalakar Walawalkar                             ...Applicant

      IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

      Vikas Kamalakar Walawalkar                             ...Plaintiff
               V/s.
      The Deputy Salt Commissioner & Ors.                    ...Defendants


      Mr.Anirudh Hariani with Mr.Varun Rathi i/b M/s.Mahimtura & Co. for
      the Plaintiff / Applicant in the Chamber Summons.

      Mr.S.R. Rajguru with Mr.A.R. Varma for the Defendant Nos.1 and 2
      - Union of India / Applicants in the Notice of Motion.

                                      CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J.

DATE : 27TH NOVEMBER, 2017.

P.C. :-

1. The matter is placed on board for speaking to the minutes

6-nms2481-16c

of the order dated 9th November, 2017. I have heard the learned

counsel for the parties and have perused the praecipe filed by the

plaintiff dated 22nd November, 2017.

2. Mr.Rajguru, learned counsel for the defendants does not

dispute the corrections pointed out in paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b) of the

praecipe. The statement is accepted.

3. Learned counsel however strongly objects to the deletion

of the word "no" in paragraph 16 at page 11 of the order. In my view,

the word "no" is inadvertently mentioned in the said paragraph and

thus deserves to be deleted. The word "no" is accordingly deleted in

paragraph 16 at page 11 of the order.

4. I therefore, pass the following order :-

a). The last sentence in paragraph 4 at page 4 of the order,

the word "plaintiff" is substituted by the word "applicants".

b). In paragraph 13 at page 8, the words " referred in" is

substituted by the word "and".

c). In paragraph 16 at page 11, the word "no" stands deleted.

d).          In paragraph 17 at page 11, the word "2016" is substituted

by the word "2006"          .

5. The order dated 9th November, 2017 stands corrected

accordingly. The praecipe is disposed of.

(R.D. DHANUKA, J.)