SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Raj) 1132

ARUN MONGA
Aaraj Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Siddharth Tatiya.

ORDER :

1. This application has been filed by applicant (respondent No.1 in the petition) seeking to rectify certain mistakes in the order dated 07.11.2023 passed in SBCWP No.4729/2023 passed by this Court vide the main case i.e. SBCWP No.4729/2023 was disposed of.

2. My attention has been drawn to the wrong noting the name of counsel for respondent No.1 in the presence sheet i.e. it ought to have been Siddharth Tatiya instead of Siddhart Tatia. Also, in para 2.2 date of appointment letter ought to be 22.05.2018 instead of 22.05.2021.

3. Furthermore, in para-6.1 of the order, it is stated that a detailed written response dated 09.03.2022 (Annex.7) was given by the petitioner Bank instead of mentioning that detailed written response dated 09.03.2022 (Annex.6) was filed by the petitioner Bank.

4. Likewise, in the last line of para-6.4, the date of impugned order ought to have been mentioned as 17.01.2023.

5. The aforesaid mistakes in the judgment are purely typographical and the same need to be corrected.

6. Registry is directed to take steps for deleting the earlier order and upload the new corrected order.

7. Accordingly, the corrected version of the judgment shall not be read as below:-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top