Chhattisgarh High Court
MCC/928/2026 of SHRI RAGHVENDRA DAS VAISHNAV Vs PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK on 30 September 2026
2026:CGHC:42715 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 928 of 2026 1 - Shri Raghvendra Das Vaishnav S/o Late Shri N D Vaishnav Aged About 61 Years R/o A -1, Anushtha Residency, P H 1, Sector 1, Jeora Sirsa Junwani Road, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Hema Das
CGHC010389162026
2026:CGHC:42715
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCC No. 928 of 2026
1 - Shri Raghvendra Das Vaishnav S/o Late Shri N D Vaishnav Aged About 61 Years R/o A-1, Anushtha Residency, P H 1, Sector 1, Jeora Sirsa Junwani Road, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Hema Das Vaishnav W/o Shri Raghvendradas Vaishnav Aged About 51 Years R/o A-1, Anushtha Residency, P H 1, Sector 1, Jeora Sirsa Junwani Road, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Punjab National Bank Through Its Authorized Officer, Civic Center Branch, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh
The Collector, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh
The Tehsildar Tehsil Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Yuvraj Singh S/o Shri Ramveer Singh Aged About 59 Years R/o M I
G, 2/429, Hudco Amdi Nagar, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Shikhar Bhaktiyar, Advocate
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/10/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present Miscellaneous Civil Case (MCC) has been filed seeking correction/modification of the clerical and typographical errors occurring in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the order dated 26.09.2026 passed in WPC No. 4916 of 2026, whereby the words “DRAT-2, Ahmadabad” are required to be substituted by the words “DRT- II, Ahmadabad, Incharge DRT, Jabalpur”, in the interest of justice.
2. Considering the aforesaid submission and the nature of the correction sought, the present Miscellaneous Civil Case is allowed. Accordingly, paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the order dated 26.09.2026 passed in WPC No. 4916 of 2026 shall stand modified to the extent that the words “DRAT-2, Ahmadabad” shall be read as “DRT-II, Ahmadabad, Incharge DRT, Jabalpur”.
3. The order dated 26.09.2026 passed in WPC No. 4916 of 2026 shall stand corrected accordingly. sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
JUDGE Madhurima