High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCC/539/2015disposed off

Bhusan Lal Dewangan v. Ku. Nidhi Dewangan

2015-08-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCC No. 539 of 2015 • Bhusan Lal Dewangan S/o Shri Kartikram Dewangan Aged About 50 Years Assistant Engineer, Janpad Panchayat Usur, Thasil And District Bijapur C.G. Present Address- B.L. Dewangan Bhusan Lal Sub Division Officer, Office Of Development Commissioner, Chhattisgarh Gramin Sadak Vikas Abhikaran, Civil Line, P.S.- Civil Line, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• Ku. Nidhi Dewangan S/o Shri Bhusan Lal Dewangan Aged About 23 Years R/o Pacharighat, Kurud, Thana And Thasil- Kurdu, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker Order On Board 26/08/2015 With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. In a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, an order was passed by this Court on 14.5.2015 directing the petitioner to pay four installments of Rs.20,000/- each to the respondent. This Court had further directed that first two installments are to be paid within two weeks from 14.5.2015 and the remaining two installments would be paid within two months thereafter.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the petitioner was

not required to pay four installments of Rs.20,000/- each and as on that day he was required to pay only two installments of Rs.20,000/- each. He submits that the petitioner has already paid one installment of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent and now there remains only one installment of Rs.20,000/- to be paid, which would be paid to the respondent within 10 days from today.

4. Counsel appearing for the respondent admits the mathematical calculation made by the petitioner. He submits that inadvertently in the order dated 14.5.2015 the petitioner was directed to pay four installments of Rs.20,000/- each whereas he is liable to pay only two such installments.

5. Considering the admission made by the counsel for the respondent, the order dated 14.5.2015 is modified to the extent that now the petitioner would pay only remaining one installment of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent within 10 days from today. In addition to this, the petitioner would also pay Rs.2,000/- to the respondent as cost of the litigation. The petition is thus disposed of. Sd/ (Pritinker Diwaker) Judge Khan