1002cac9.11.odt 1/1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAC) NO. 9 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION N0. 102 OFO 2010 (D) (Kailashchandra Jankolal Bundiwal & others Vs. Ashok Jagdishchandra Bundiwal) ........................................................................................................................................................................ .. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ...................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 10 FEBRUARY, 2011. 1. Heard Shri R. M. Sharma, learned Counsel for the applicants and Shri S. V. Bhutada, learned Counsel for respondents. 2. This is an application for modification/clarification of order dated 17/01/2011 passed by this Court in civil revision application No. 102 of 2010. The last para of the said order is reproduced below.: “Needless to mention that any of the observations which are made on the merits of the matter, would not come in the way of the parties when the Court would decide the question on merits.” 3. Shri Sharma, learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the clarification should be issued that the observations made by the trial Court in the order passed on the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code should not come in the way of the parties while deciding the question on merits. 4. Shri Bhutada, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that there is no case made out for issuing clarification as the clarification sought is implicit in the order itself, as it is the legal effect. 5. In view of the above, no clarification is required in the matter, as the parties have rightly understood such clarification as implicit in the order. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE wwl