1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1264 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1290 OF 200 Mahavir Sales Corporation........Applicants versus M/s. Gaurishankar Process & ors........ Respondents. Mr. R.R. Singh i/b. P.R. Arjunwadkar adv. for the Applicants Mr. B.D. Joshi adv. for the respondents 1,2& 3. Mr. Nitin Gangal adv. For respondent no.4. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 31st MARCH, 2009. P.C.: 1. By the present application, two fold prayers are made: (1) for correcting the error in the order dated 3rd June 2008 which according to the learned counsel for the applicant is obvious. This court while permitting the applicant to withdraw the amount has directed the applicant to file an undertaking that in the event if the applicant succeeds in the appeal, the applicant will bring back the amount together with interest at the rate of 12% per month. The submission is that the rate of interest ought to be 12% per annum. The learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the same to be a typographical error and does not oppose the correction. In the result, the same is granted. In the last but one line of the order dated 3rd June 2008, the rate of interest typed as 12% p.m. shall stand corrected as 12% p.a. 2 2. The next submission is in regard to seeking modification of the order dated 3rd June 2008. The said order permits withdrawal of the amount on furnishing bank guarantee whereas the modification sought for is in the nature of diluting the said order and permitting the applicant to furnish security instead of Bank guarantee. It is obvious that the present application moved under the grab of modification of the order is misconceived and in case the applicant wants any change in the order, he needs to apply for review of the order. In this view of the matter the application to the extent it seeks dispensing with Bank guarantee stands rejected, however, with liberty to the applicant to apply for review. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)