1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1435 OF 2009 IN APPEAL NO. 239 OF 2002 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2574 OF 2001 IN LAND ACQUISITION REFERENCE NO. 37 OF 1980. The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., .. Petitioner. vs. The Trustee, Kshatriya Dnyati Sabha Sabha & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr. S.R. Rajguru for the Petitioner. Mr. L.C. Chogle for Respondent No. 1. CORAM : J. N. PATEL & SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. DATE : 27TH NOVEMBER, 2009 (IN CHAMBER AT 2.35 P.M.) 2 P.C. : A praecipe has been taken out by the respondent to emphasise that by virtue of the order dated 12.3.2009 the petition would have otherwise been dismissed for non-compliance of the condition imposed by the Court and, therefore, subsequently when on 12.10.2009 we allowed the notice of motion in terms of prayer clause (b) subject to payment of costs of Rs. 20,000/-, could not have been granted. 2. We do not find that the order dated 12.10.2009 in any manner causes prejudice to the respondents and secondly the said order does not impose any restrictions on the powers of the Court to grant prayer clause (b) of notice of motion for the reasons stated in the affidavit in support of the notice of motion as it is the settled position that no party should be made to suffer for the fault of the advocates appearing for the parties due to non-availability of the authenticated copy of the order passed by this Court as the order dated 12.3.2009 was not loaded on the internet till 31.3.2009 due to the P.A. being on leave. Even otherwise, this Court in its inherent powers under Section 151 of the CPC can always pass appropriate orders in the interest of justice. 3. The respondents/claimants are entitled to withdraw the 3 sum of Rs. 20,000/- deposited in this Court by the appellants. ( J. N. PATEL, J.) ( SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J.)