\\ Apfllicant Petitiosier HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.C.C. No. 01 of2009 M/s Shri Bhawani Pulses, Tlu-ough: Its Pailner Narsing Das Bhootda, S/o Late Shri Madan Lal Ji Bhootda, aged about 48 years, Registered Office at Chandrakhuri, District Durg(CG). Respondents VERSUS 1. Centi-al Bank of India A company coiporate, Constituted underflie Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, Throu^i The Managing Director, Head Ofiice at Chandrarnuklii, Nariman Point Mumbai (Maharashtra). 2. The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Raipur(CG). 3. Branch Manager Central Bank ofjlndia, Branch Durg at Rungta Bhawan, GE Road, Durg, District Chhattisgarh (CG). (Application fbr correction oftypographical mistake in orderdated 05.12.08) rSB; Hon'bie Mr. Satish K. Agmliotri, J.) Present : Stm P.R. Patankar, Advocate forthe applicant/petitioner. None forthe respondents. /• ORALORDER (Passed on 12thday ofJanuary, 2009) y 1. The petitioner, by this petition, seeks coiTection of typogi-aphical niistakes crept in the order dated 05.12.08. 2. On heai-ing leamed counsel appeai-ing for the applicant, and pemsal ofthe papers, it is evident that inadvertently some typogi'aphical mistakes have crept in in para 2 ofthe order dated 05.12.08. The same may be read as under : "Leamed counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits that the instant petition w~as filed cn the groiind that no Pi'esidmg Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short 'DRT') at Jabalpur was available to hear the matter. He faslher submits that the respondent Bank has already filed aii application being O.A. No. 139/03 underSection 19 ofthe Securitization and Reconstruction ofFmancial Assets and Enforcement ofSecurityInterestAct, 2002 (for shortthe Act,2002'), beforethe Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur (for short 'DRT, Jabalpur'), against the recoveiy proceedings, and the same is pending consideration." '^: 3. In para 4 also, the word "that since 1iie petitioner has already pref^^ an appeal" may be read as "that since the respondent Bank has already preferred 1 ati application". 4. In para 5, the word Hand further that the petitioner has already filed an appeal" may be read as ??and further fhat the respondent^^^^^^^B has already iiled an application". 5. Further, the word "to pursue the pending ffppeal" may be read as "to pursue the pending application". K ^ 6. The order dated 05.12.2008 shall be amended by this order after correction of typogi'aphical mistakes^a new certified copy ofthe order may be issued. 7. Accordingly, tliis petition is disposed of. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^ Sahu Ifc-