The Uniworld Garden Apartment Owners’ Association v. Unitech Realty Private Ltd.

Delhi High Court · 12 Feb 2016 · 2016:DHC:1214
Rajiv Shakdher
CO. PET. 513/2014
2016:DHC:1214
civil other Procedural

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed correction of typographical errors in its earlier order to accurately include respondent no.5 and correct the disposal status of CA 342/2016.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CO. PET. 513/2014
THE UNIWORLD GARDEN APARTMENT
OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jatin Mongia, Mr. Manan Chadha and Mr. Raghav Vacher, Advocate
VERSUS
UNITECH REALTY PRIVATE LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Anant Garg, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER O R D E R 12.02.2016
CA 521/2016 (for correction of order dated 08.02.2016)
JUDGMENT

1. This application has been filed to bring to the notice of this court that there are certain typographical errors, which appear to have crept in the order dated 08.02.2016 passed in CA 342/2016. The errors pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner are, broadly, two: - (i). The first error, is that, there is no reference to respondent no.5/contemnor no.5 in paragraph 4.2, 4.3, 5 and 6. (ii). The second error, pointed out, is that, in paragraph 8, this court has observed that CA 375/2015 is disposed of, whereas what should have been indicated, was that, CA 342/2016 stood disposed of.

3. The learned counsel for the non-applicants do not dispute the aforesaid aspects pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.[1] Accordingly, order dated 08.02.2016, is corrected to the following extent: - CO. PET. 513/2014 2016:DHC:1214 (i). In paragraph 4.2, 4.3, 5 and 6, in addition to respondent no.2 to 4 / contemnor no.2 to 4, there shall be a reference to respondent no.5/contemnor no.5, as well. (ii). Furthermore, paragraph 8 will now read as follows: CA 342/2016 is accordingly disposed of, instead of what is presently noted in paragraph 8 of the order dated 08.02.2016 3.[2] Other directions contained in the order dated 08.02.2016, shall remain unaltered. 3.[3] CA 375/2015 will consequently, be listed on the date already fixed in the matter i.e. 18.02.2016.

4. In view of the order passed today vis-a-vis respondent no.5 / contemnor no.5, he is given three days to comply with the directions contained in the order dated 08.02.2016.

5. The captioned application is, accordingly, disposed of.

6. Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J FEBRUARY 12, 2016