1 F.A. 241/1994 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 241/1994 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : SMT. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : 17th October, 2011. Mr. S.D. Kulkarni, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. P.P. More, A.G.P. for respondent sole. SPEAKING TO MINUTES. 1. Heard. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that in the judgment passed by this Court, in paragraph 11(b), the Court has given the benefit of solatium under section 23(2) of the Act. However, the interest is not mentioned. Learned counsel relied on paras 27 and 28 of the judgment given by the Bench of five judges in Sunder Vs. Union of India 2001(4) ALL MR 550 (S.C.). 3. Learned A.G.P. opposing speaking to minutes on the ground that this can not be relied for speaking to minutes. 4. 30% solatium was awarded. However, it appears that inadvertently the interest is not mentioned. In view of para 27 and 28 of the judgment 2 F.A. 241/1994 in Sunder Vs. Union of India supra, the mistake in speaking to minutes is corrected as below. The interest which is not inadvertently mentioned is to be added as under in para 11(b): “The appellant is entitled to seek benefit of solatium under Section 23 (2) of the Act at the rate of 30% of such market value with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the appeal”, in consideration of the compulsory nature of acquisition. [SMT. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] ts k/2011/Oct.2011/fa241.94