Allowed

Shri Subhash S/O Uttamrao Brahmapurikar v. Jaihind Co-Op. Housing Society, Thr. Pres. Shri Mahesh S/O Shrawan Charde and Others

Bombay HC2 May 2024CAF/981/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil application seeking corrections to an impugned judgment due to inadvertent errors in document dates, parties, and deed numbers. The court allowed the application and ordered necessary corrections.

What did the court decide?

Order corrections to the judgment regarding dates and respondent details in operative paragraphs and upload corrected copy immediately.

Shri Subhash S/O Uttamrao Brahmapurikar Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:5219

¶2

1 caf 981.24.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

¶4

Civil Application (CAF) No. 981 of 2024 in First Appeal No. 1596 of 2019 (D)

¶5

[Shri Subhash Uttamrao Bramhapurikar ..vs.. Jaihind Co-op. Hsg. Soc. through its President Shri M. S. Charde, Somalwada, Nagpur and ors.]

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Mr. V. V. Bhangde, Advocate for the applicant/appellant

¶10

CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE J

¶11

DATED : 02-05-2024

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the copy of the application has been served upon learned counsel appearing for contesting respondents i.e. respondent nos. 3 and 4, however, none appeared.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant invited my attention to paragraph no. 11 of the judgment dated 6-3-2024 in First Appeal No. 1596/2019 wherein there occurred inadvertent error. The words “certified copy of sale-deed dated 6/2/1990” be replaced by “original sale-deed dated 22/4/1987”.

¶14

Similarly, in paragraph no. 11, in the expression “he has further proved that the sale-deed dated 5/10/1990 executed between respondent nos. 2 and 3 as also the sale-deed dated 15/5/2014 executed between respondent nos. 3 and 4 are liable to be set aside”, the words, “respondent nos. 2 and 3” be replaced by “respondent nos. 1 and 2” and the words “respondent nos. 3 and 4” be replaced by “respondent nos. 2 and 3”.

¶15

In para [iii] of the operative part of the order, the words “the sale-deed bearing no. 1606/14 dated

¶16

2 caf 981.24.odt

¶17

15/5/2014” be replaced by “the sale-deed bearing no. 4940/2014 dated 25/9/2014”. The words “respondent nos. 2 and 3” appearing thereafter be replaced by “respondent nos. 3 and 4”.

¶18

The necessary corrections be carried out and corrected copy be uploaded forthwith.

¶19

The application is disposed of in above terms.

¶20

(Anil L. Pansare, J.)

¶21

wasnik

Shri Subhash S/O Uttamrao Brahmapurikar v. Jaihind Co-Op. Housing Society, Thr. Pres. Shri Mahesh S/O Shrawan Charde and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Subhash S/O Uttamrao Brahmapurikar v. Jaihind Co-Op. Housing Society, Thr. Pres. Shri Mahesh S/O Shrawan Charde and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahadeo S/O Narayan Lende Vs Purshottam S/O Narayan Ramteke

Shankar Linganna Gonelwar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Chandrapur and Others

Hiraman Jagobaji Khobragade and Ors. Vs Ghanshyam Bisen Gajbhiye and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra through Collector, Nagpur and 2 Others Vs Anant S/O Manikrao Dhavad

The State of Maha., through Collector, Nagpur and Others Vs Smt. Indirabai W/O. Bhagvatrao Gayakwad

Chandrakant Vijaykumar Vekhande vs Smt. Suchita Wd/O Vinod Vitonde and Others