1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY C IVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO. 22403 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 910 OF 2008 Dr. Shri Anil Dhanpal Upadhye ... Applicant Vs. Shri Dipak Ramchandra Gathe ... Respondent Mr. A.P.Kulkarni, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. Shirshat Chavan i/b. Mr.S.M.Oak for the respoondent. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 20th July, 2009. P.C. 1. Review petition be registered. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant points out that in para 1 on page 2 of the order dated 24.7.2008 passed by this Court while dismissing the First Appeal No.910 of 2008, it was wrongly recorded that suit was dismissed in default. According to him, the Counsel had committed mistake 2 by making that statement and in fact the suit was withdrawn. Therefore, the sentence “That suit was dismissed in default” shall be substituted by the sentence “The suit was dismissed as withdrawn”. 4. The learned counsel contends that as the earlier suit was withdrawn, the provisions of Order II Rule 2 of C.P.C. would not be applicable to the second suit i.e. Special Civil Suit No.90 of 2007 filed by the plaintiff/appellant for specific performance of the contract. The certified copy of the pursis, which was filed for withdrawing Regular Civil Suit No.193 of 2004, nowhere it was mentioned that the said suit was being withdrawn because another suit was filed for specific performance of the contract nor any leave was sought from the Court to file another suit on the same cause of action. In view of this, I am not impressed with the contention of the learned Counsel that the provisions of Order II Rule 2 of C.P.C. would not be applicable to the latter suit. 5. Therefore, the Review Petition stands dismissed. Howeer, the order dated 24.7.2008 be corrected as per para 3. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) 3