Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Udaipur Tollway Limited vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 4080 Raj/2

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 4080 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 26 August, 2021

Rajasthan High Court
Udaipur Tollway Limited vs Union Of India on 26 August, 2021
Bench: Indrajit Mahanty, Satish Kumar Sharma
      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

        D.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 128/2021

            In (DB Civil Writ Petition No.11042/2020)

1.     Udaipur Tollway Limited, Registered Office At 1101
       Hiranandani Knowledge Park, 11Th Floow, Technology
       Street, Hill Side Avenue, Opp. Hiranandani Hospital,
       Powai, Mumbai-400 076 And Regional Office At Barkheda
       Chandlai Toll Plaza, Main Tonk Road, Nh-12, Near
       Shivdaspura,    Tehsil-Chaksu Distt.    Jaipur-303903
       (Rajasthan)
2.     Cg Tollway Limited, Registered Office At 1101 Hiranandani
       Knowledge Park, 11Thfloow, Technology Street, Hill Side
       Avenue, Opp. Hiranandani Hospital, Powai, Mumbai-400
       076 And Regional Office At Barkheda Chandlai Toll Plaza,
       Main Tonk Road, Nh-12, Near Shivdaspura, Tehsil-Chaksu
       Distt. Jaipur-303903 (Rajasthan)
3.     Kishangarh Gulabpura Tollway Limited, Registered Office
       At 1101 Hiranandani Knowledge Park, 11Thfloow,
       Technology Street, Hill Side Avenue, Opp. Hiranandani
       Hospital, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 And Regional Office At
       Barkheda Chandlai Toll Plaza, Main Tonk Road, Nh-12,
       Near Shivdaspura, Tehsil-Chaksu Distt. Jaipur-303903
       (Rajasthan) Through Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, S/o Shri
       Ranjit Singh Aged About 49 Years Residing At T-896,
       Block-24, Rangoli Gardens, Near Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur
       (Rajasthan) Pin-302034
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Road
       Transport And Highways, Transport Bhawan, 1, Parliament
       Street, New Delhi - 110 001
2.     National Highways Authority Of India (Nhai), Through
       Chairman, Having Office At G-5 And 6, Sector 10,
       Dwarka, New Delhi- 110075
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.V. Nandwana Mr. Y.V. Nandwana Mr. P.C. Sharma Mr. Vinod Menon, through VC Ms. Teresa Daulat, through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ASG through VC Mr. Sudhir Gupta Sr. Advocate with Mr. Umang Gupta Ms. Shweta Chohan Mr. Peeyush Agarwal Ms. Priyal Kothari

(2 of 3) [WMAP-128/2021]

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

Order

26/08/2021

1. This application has been filed for rectification of error in the

judgment dated 25-8-2021 passed in DB Civil Writ Petition

No.11042/2020.

2. Reply to application has been filed by the respondent

National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).

3. Heard learned counsel appearing for both the sides and

perused the material made available on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in para

38(v) of the judgment the words "six months from" between the

words "till" and "the date of completion" are missing inadvertently.

Therefore, this inadvertent error should be rectified to make the

operative part of the judgment consistent with the findings of the

court.

5. Mr. R.D. Rastogi, learned ASG and Mr. Sudhir Gupta, learned

Senior Counsel for NHAI have vehemently opposed the application

with the submission that after passing the judgment, this court

has become functus officio and the present application seeking

modification on merits cannot be held maintainable at all.

6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides, we are of

the firm view that after passing the judgment, any modification on

merits is not permissible, but inadvertent errors which are

inconsistent with the findings can always be rectified, therefore,

the application is allowed and in para 38(v) of the judgment the

(3 of 3) [WMAP-128/2021]

words "or till the date of completion of the project whichever is

earlier", be deleted being absolutely unnecessary and inconsistent

with the findings of the court.

(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ

Arn/c-1

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter