v.

Contempt Petition No.1213 of 2016 T.S.Sivagnanam, J., This matter is listed today, under the caption "For Being Mentioned".

2.

It is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, in the first portion of para No.2 of the order passed in the Contempt Petition, dated 22.07.2016, i.e., in the third sentence, factual mistakes have occurred, and the learned counsel requests that the same may be corrected. Next, it is pointed by the learned counsel that in the third and fourth sentences of the same para, in stead of mentioning as '5' sale deeds, it shall be mentioned as '7'.

3.

Accordingly, the following portion of para No.2, quoted under the caption 'A', shall be replaced with portion, quoted under the caption 'B'.

'A'

"It is pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Board that there are

more than 40 shops in the complex and for except 5, all of them have been granted sale deeds only for the superstructure as the Board has retained." 'B'

"It is pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Board that there are more than 40 shops in the Complex, and only in respect of 7 sales deeds, which have been executed along with the undivided share, in respect of others, the Board has retained its right over the land". 4.

Similarly, the numeric digit '5' mentioned in the fourth sentences of para No.2, shall be replaced with '7'. The abovesaid corrections shall be carried out, and fresh order copy may be issued.

11.08.2016 sd

T.S.Sivagnanam, J., sd Contempt Petition No.1213 of 2016 11.08.2016