IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.23 OF 2008 IN APPEAL NO.234 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4775 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.2020 OF 1988 Virendra Mohan Bhardwaj .. Petitioner v/s. Union Bank of India .. Respondent ALONGWITH REVIEW PETITION NO.24 OF 2008 IN APPEAL NO.233 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4766 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.2121 OF 1988 Virendra Mohan Bhardwaj .. Petitioner v/s. Union Bank of India .. Respondent Mr. V.M. Bharadwas- petitioner-in-person. Mr. Manish Doshi i/by M/s. Vimadalal & Co.for the respondent. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., & V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 8TH AUGUST , 2008 P.C.: We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We see no reason to review or recall the order passed by us earlier. The application ought not to have been filed. Be that as it may, the counsel for the non-applicant submits that they would not press for payment of costs. No other ground is made out in terms or Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Review Applications are accordingly, dismissed. 2. There is a typographical error in the opening paragraph of the order dated 6th June, 2008 wherein instead of the words “should be permitted to rely upon”, the words “should not be permitted to rely upon” be read. Necessary corrections be made in the said order and corrected copies be supplies to the parties. CHIEF JUSTICE V.M. KANADE , J.