IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.33 of 2010 1. ONKAR NATH PATHAK S/O CHINTAMANI PATHAK R/O VILL & PO- MAHADEOGANJ, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ, PERMANENT R/O VILL- KAITHPURA, P.S- BARHAT, DISTT- BANKA Versus 1. RAJENDRA PRASAD YADAV S/O SRI VIKRAM YADAV R/O VILL- MAHADEOGANJ, P.S- MAHARJGANJ, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ 2. BIPIN BIHARI PATHAK S/O CHINTAMANI PATHAK R/O VILL- KAITHPURA, P.S BARHAT, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ 3. THE MANAGING (CO-ORDINATION CELL) BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION HEAD OFFICE, PATNA 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, DEOGHAR with C. REV. No.34 of 2010 1. ONKAR NATH PATHAK S/O CHINTAMANI PATHAK R/O VILL &PO- MAHADEOGANJ, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ, PERMANENT R/O VILL- KAITHPURA, P.S- BARHAT, DISTT- BANKA Versus 1. RAJENDRA PRASAD YADAV S/O SRI VIKRAM YADAV R/O VILL- MAHADEOGANJ, P.S- MAHARAJGANJ, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ 2. THE BIHAR STATE FINANCE CORPORATION, FRAZER ROAD, PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE FINANCE CORPORATION, FRAZER ROAD , PATNA 3. THE BRANCH MNAGER, null BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, DEOGHAR 4. THE MANAGING (CO-ORDINATION CELL) BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, HEAD OFFICE, PATNA 5. BIPIN BIHARI PATHAK S/O CHINTAMANI PATHAK R/O VILL- KAITHPURA, P.S BARHAT, DISTT- SAHEBGANJ ----------- For appellants:- Sri K.N.Gupta, Advocate Sri Satendra Krishna Prasad, Advocate For respondents:- Sri Shivaji Pandey, Sr. Advocate Sri Subodh Kumar Jha, Advocate Sri Amrendra Kumar, Advocate ---------- 05. 29-Jun-2010 An order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court 2 dated 15.6.2010 in C.C. 9275-9276 of 2010 has been brought to our notice through an MJC petition. A perusal of that order shows that the petitioner had challenged orders of this Court passed in L.P.A. No. 771 of 2009 as well as in Civil Review No. 33 and 34 of 2010 before the Apex Court. After condoning the delay Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition and extended the time for payment of the remaining amount till 30th June, 2010. Thereafter, the Apex Court has observed that according to the petitioner he has already paid Rs.4 Lacs and if that is so, the petitioner would be at liberty to bring it to the notice of the Court. 2. The petitioner has brought to our notice the admitted fact that prior to passing of the compromise order in L.P.A. No. 771 of 2009 dated 27.01.2010 he had made payments to the tune of Rs.4 Lacs to the Bihar State Financial Corporation through three bank drafts dated 11.05.2009, 13.05.2009 and 25.05.2009. 3. We further noticed that those payments are of no consequence so far as the compromise order is concerned which has been passed later on the basis of all the facts already available before the Court. 3 4. No further order is required to be passed in this matter. The M.J.C. petition is disposed of. perwez (R.M. Doshit, C.J.) (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)