Ajay Pandurang Potdar And ANR v. Saturn Chemicals
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1009 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.808 OF 2015 Ajay Pandurang Potdar & Anr.
...
Applicants In the matter between Saturn Chemicals ...
Appellant V/s.
M/s.Eshaditi Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
...
Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1082 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.808 OF 2015 Dhanjay Narhar Navangul & Anr.
...
Applicants In the matter between Saturn Chemicals ...
Appellant V/s.
M/s.Eshaditi Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
...
Respondents .....
Mr.Santosh Pawar, Advocate for the Applicants. Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the Respondent/State.
....
CORAM :
P. N. DESHMUKH J.
DATED :
13th OCTOBER 2016.
P.C.
Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board. Learned counsel for the applicants has pointed that according to the Memo of Appeal and Application name of appellant is 1/3
Saturn Chemicals and of respondent is M/s.Eshaditi Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. However, in the title of common order dated 4th October 2016 in these applications names of appellant and respondent erroneously mentioned thereby stating name of appellant in Criminal Application No.1009 of 2016 as Eshaditi Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and of respondent as M/s.Saturn Chemicals and in Criminal Application No.1082 of 2016 name of applicant is Dhanjay Narhar Navangul & Anr. and of respondent as 'M/s.Saturn Chemicals'.
In the circumstances and considering the typographical error committed as aforesaid, name of appellant in both the applications is corrected as 'M/s.Saturn Chemicals' and name of respondent in both the applications as of 'M/s.Eshaditi Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.,' and name of applicants in Criminal Application No.1009 of 2016 be shown as Ajay Pandurang Potdar and Anr. and in Criminal Application No.1082 of 2016 name of applicants be shown as 'Dhanjay Narhar Navangul and Anr.'
Office to note and and carry out necessary corrections, as aforesaid.
Learned counsel for the applicants has further contended that respondent Nos.2,4 and 5 are directed to execute the bond in the sum of Rs.500/- each before the trial Court within a period of two weeks from the date of order. However writ is not yet issued and thus submits that said time which expires on 18th October 2016 be extended. 2/3
In that view of the matter, time granted to respondent Nos.2,4 and 5 to execute bond, as aforesaid, stands extended for a period of one month from the date of order i.e. 4th October 2016 as granted to respondent No.3.
In that view of the matter, both the applications be shown on board on 15th November 2016, for compliance and necessary order, if any.
(P. N. DESHMUKH J.) 3/3