Shankar Mahadhu Patade Died Thr Lrs ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 24009 Bom

Bombay High Court

Shankar Mahadhu Patade Died Thr Lrs ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 14 August, 2024

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    923 WRIT PETITION NO. 8741 OF 2023

 SHANKAR MAHADHU PATADE DIED THR LRS RAMLING SHANKAR PATADE
                                VERSUS
            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                  ...
        Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Choudhari Sushant B.
             AGP for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. N.D. Raje
            Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. S.B. Ghute
                                  ...
                CORAM          : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

                      Dated         : August 14, 2024
PER COURT :-

1. The matter is moved for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 22nd July 2024 passed by this Court (Coram : R.M. Joshi, J.).

2. It is the contention of the petitioner is that the interest on enhanced amount (if any) is denied from the date of dismissal of the reference till the date of filing the writ petition and that there is a typing error or inadvertent error in the order dated 22.7.2024 wherein the interest on award of reference court is denied till the date of above order from inception. However, on perusal of para 8 of the order dated 22 nd July 2024, it appears that this Court has specifically observed after considering earlier judgments of this Court and departing from the view taken in earlier judgments that the petitioner would not be entitled to seek any interest till date of order (22.7.2024) on the enhanced amount, if granted by the Reference Court.

3. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the observation of this Court in above order dated 22.7.2024, this Court finds that the present motion amounts to review of the order dated 22 nd July 2024. As such, the motion of speaking to minutes is not maintainable.

4. The petitioner is at liberty to file review application, if he so desires.

5. The motion is disposed of accordingly.

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )

ssc/