1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION F. NO.2754/2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.590/2008 Executive Engineer, Bembla Project Division, Awadhootwadi, Yavatmal ...Versus... Govindrao s/o Laxmanrao Mehatre and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. [Shri A.B. Patil, Adv. for appellant] [Ms Mahashabde, Adv. h/f Shri D.M. Upadhye, Adv. for respdt. no.1] [Smt. S.S. Jachak, AGP for respdt. nos.8 & 9] CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : 21.10.2011. This civil application has been filed by the claimants for withdrawal of amount of Rs.2,73,370/-. It appears that this court had made an order on Civil Application No.2438/2010 on 30.09.2010, permitting the respondent no.1 to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,48,000/- on furnishing solvent surety/security. It further appears that pursuant to the said order, surety was quantified. It appears that there are in all seven claimants in whose favour award was passed. But Civil Application No.2438/2010 shows only one non-applicant no.1 - Govindrao and not other six. Thus, only non-applicant no.1  Govindrao had asked withdrawal of the decretal amount. 2 Now this new application is silent about the above facts. Not only that both the learned Counsel for the appellant and respondent no.1 did not point out filing of Civil Application No.2438/2010 or making the said order dated 30.09.2010. As a result, on 20.10.2011, this Court had pronounced an order in the open Court, allowing withdrawal of the entire amount as shown in the prayer to this civil application. But all the above facts came to notice before signing the order. Hence, the appeal has been again listed today. From the above, it is clear that both the Counsel for appellant and claimant have acted negligently and irresponsibly and have misled the Court. Counsel for respondent no.1 will have to clarify as to how only respondent no.1 had claimed withdrawal of entire amount when there are six additional claimants and whether respondent no.1 had authority from others. Hence, the following order. O R D E R Civil Application No.2754/2011 is dismissed. Respondent no.1 to clarify above. Counsel for appellant and respondent no.1 to pay costs of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred 3 Only) each to the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur for misleading the Court. FIRST APPEAL NO.590/2008 Stand over to 11.11.2011. JUDGE ssw