Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

NANDKUMAR INFRASTRUCTURE LLP THR. AUTHORISED PERSONversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Disposal
Allowed To be withdrawn

Holding

The order dated 04.03.2026 is corrected to include the appearance of counsel for Respondents Nos.2 & 3.

Summary

The petitioner, Nandkumar Infrastructure LLP, filed a writ petition seeking correction of the minutes of an order dated 04.03.2026, as the appearance of counsel for Respondents Nos.2 and 3 was omitted. Respondents Nos.2 and 3 submitted a praecipe on 07.03.2026 requesting that the court record the correct appearance of their advocates. The Court examined whether such a correction could be made under procedural rules. It held that the order could be amended to reflect the correct counsel details without affecting the substantive relief. Consequently, the order was corrected to include the names of Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye, Mr. Shantanu Gurav, and Ms. Dnyaneshwari Utpat, and the praecipe was disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the order dated 04.03.2026 can be corrected to reflect the appearance of counsel for Respondents Nos.2 & 3

Subjects

  • order correction
  • court minutes
  • advocate appearance
  • procedural amendment
  • praecipe

Judgment

                                                                                  5-WP-11755-2025 (C).doc


                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                              CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 11755 OF 2025

                        Nandkumar Infrastructure LLP Through Authorised Person       ...Petitioner
                              VERSUS
                        The State of Maharashtra And Ors.                            ...Respondents
                                                    ——————
                        Mr. Shivam M. Walekar i/by Mr. Suryajeet Chavan, for the Petitioner.
                        Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State.
                        Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye a/w Mr. Shantanu Gurav and Ms. Dnyaneshwari
                        Utpat, for Respondent Nos.2 & 3.
                                                     ——————
                                                      CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR &
                                                                PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.

                                                          DATE       :   9th MARCH, 2026.
                        P. C. :

                        1.        The learned Advocate appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 has

                        submitted a praecipe dated 07.03.2026 seeking speaking to the minutes

                        of order dated 04.03.2026, as the appearance of learned Advocate has

                        not been recorded in the order dated 04.03.2026.

                        2.        Accordingly, order dated 04.03.2026 be corrected by showing the

                        following appearance of learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3

                        and corrected order be uploaded on the official website.

                                  “Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye a/w Mr. Shantanu Gurav and Ms.
                                  Dnyaneshwari Utpat, for Respondent Nos.2 & 3.”

                        3.        The praecipe dated 07.03.2026 is disposed of.


           Digitally
           signed by
SAJAKALI
           SAJAKALI
           LIYAKAT           [PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.]                         [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
LIYAKAT    JAMADAR
JAMADAR    Date:
           2026.03.09
           20:50:44
           +0530


                        Sajakali Jamadar                    1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.