-r~ HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR M.C.C. No. 02 of2009 Applicant/ Pefitioiwr Respondents M/s Shri Bhawani Agro Products, Throug^i: Its Partner Narsing Das Bhootda, S/o Late Shri Madan Lal Ji Bhootda, aged about 48 years, Registered Office at Chandrakhuri, i DistrictDurg(CG). VERSUS 1. Central Bank of Jjndia A company corporate, Constituted under the Banking Compames (Acquisition and Traiisfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, Through The Managing Director, Head Office at Chandramukfai, Nariman Point Mumbai (Maharashtra). 2. The Regianal Manager, Central Barik of India, Regional Qffice,Raipur(CG). 3. Branch Manager Central Barik of India, Branch Durg at Rungta Bhawan, GE Road, Durg, District Chhattisgarh (CG). (Appiication for correction oftypographical mistake in order dated 05.12.08) fSB: Hon*ble Mr. Satish K. Aenihotri. J.) Present IINB<«t»" Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate forlhe applicant/petitioner. None for fhe respondents. ORALORDER (Passcd on 14th day ofJanuary, 2009) 1. rfhe petitioner, by this petition, seeks correction of typographieal mistakes crept in fhe order dated 05.12.08 passed in W.P(C) No. 1812/08. 2. Qn hearing leamed counsel appearing for the applicant, and pearusal oftihe papers, it is evident that inadvertently some typographical mistakes have crept in in para 2 ofthe order dated 05.12.08. The same may be read as under : "Leamed counsel appearmg for fhe petitioaer submite that fhe instant petition was filed cn the ground that no Presiding Qffieer in Debts Recovery Tribunal (fbr short 'DRT') at Jabalpur was available to hear the matter. He farther submits tfaat the respondent Bank has already filed an appUcation being O.A. No. 142/03 under Section 19 oftfae Securitization and Reconstoiction ofFmaticial Assete and Enforcement ofSecurity Interest Act, 2002 (tor short the Act, 2002'), before the Debt i^£^^^ Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur (for short 'DRT, Jabalpur'), agaiast(fhe\ recovery proceedings, and the same is penditig consideration." 3. In para 4 also., fhe word "Itaat sitice fhe petitioner has already preferred an appeaF' may be read as "that since the respondent Bank has already pref©rred an application". 4. In para 5, Ifae word "afid farther fhat the petitioner has already filed an appeal" may be read as "and further that the respondeirt Bank has already filed an applicatioii". 5. Furtfaer, Ifae word t(to pui^ue fhe pendmg appeaf may be read as Mto pursue Ae pending application". 6. The order dated 05.12.2008 shall be amended bytiiis order atter cc^rection of typographical mistakes, a new certified copy ofthe order may be issued. ; 7. Accordin^ly, this petitiouis disposed of Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Axnit