1 CA 2505/2011 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2505 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6877 OF 2009 Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra & ors. .. Respondents Mr. R.V. Talasikar for the petitioner. Mr. S.D. Rairikar, A.G.P. for the respondents. CORAM: D.G. KARNIK & S.J. KATHAWALA, JJ. DATED : 8TH DECEMBER 2011 P.C: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The writ petition was admitted by an order dated 14th August 2009. An ad-interim relief was also granted in terms of prayer (b). Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that prayer (b) is in respect of final relief and not in respect of an interim relief. The interim relief claimed was in terms of prayer (d). 2 CA 2505/2011 3. After having perused the prayer clauses (b) and (d), we are satisfied that mention of prayer clause (b) in the order dated 14th August 2009 is a typographical error and in fact interim relief in terms of prayer (d) was to be granted. Learned A.G.P. for the respondents also states that this is a typographical error. 4. Counsel for the petitioner further states that in the meanwhile no further assessment has been made. In view of this, we pass the following order. In paragraph 2 of the order dated 14th August 2009, substitute the words "clause (d)" for the words "clause (b)". The civil application is disposed of. (D.G.KARNIK, J.) (S.J. KATHAWALA, J.)