IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 927 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 204 OF 2003 SHRI. PANDURANG V. SAWANT AND 3 ORS., ... Applicants Versus GOA HOUSING BOARD THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ... Respondent Mr. Sudin M. S. Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, Senior Advocate with Mr. H. D. Naik, Advocate for the Respondent. Coram:- P. B. MAJMUDAR & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 29th January, 2009 P.C.:- Heard. At the request of Shri Sudin M. S. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the Applicants, the application is treated as an application for speaking to the Minutes. There is no dispute that the sale deed Exh.AW1/G was executed about four years prior to the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Being so, there is an error apparent in mentioning the said period as three years in the first two lines of para 10 of the Judgment dated 16-4-2008. If notional increase of 10% was to be given, the price would work out to Rs.210/- per sq. meter. Consequently the figure Rs.195/- in fifth line of para 10 will have to be read as Rs.210/- and the figures 136.5 both in paras 10 and 11 will have to be read as Rs.147/-. The Judgment dated 16-4-2008 shall stand corrected accordingly and as a result the Applicants would be required to be paid compensation at the rate of Rs.147/- per sq. meter with consequential statutory benefits. Judgment be corrected accordingly. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.