The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Appellate Side, Bench at Aurangabad) disposed of a criminal revision application moving for a clerical correction to a date in a prior operative order.
Correction made to the operative order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
crra90.02
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATIONNO. 90 OF 2002 [Hemant Kashinath Gaikwad vs Sau. Surekha Hemant Gaikwad and anr.]
_________________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office |
Memoranda of Coram, |
appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders
orders or |
directions and |
Registrar's orders |
Shri A.P.Bhandari, advocate for the applicant Shri V.P.Kale, A.P.P. for respondent/State Smt. C.E.Gaikwad, advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2
CORAM : V.M.DESHPANDE, J.
DATED : 18th February, 2015
PER COURT :-
1] This motion is moved by the learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 for correcting the typographical mistake that has occurred in column (3) of the operative order of the judgment of this court delivered on 30.1.2015. In clause (3) of the operative order, the date ‘27.2.2015’ is appearing. It is a typing mistake. Instead of the same, it should appear and be read as ‘30.1.2015’.
crra90.02
2
2] Necessary correction be made accordingly.
Motion disposed of.
[V.M.DESHPANDE, J.]
dbm/crra90.02
Hemant Kashinath Gaikwad
Sau. Surekha Hemant Gaikwad
anr.
V.M.DESHPANDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court