RBL Bank Limited vs SAHAYOG CLEAN MILK PVT LTD on 15 July 2022

CONTD. ORDER.SHE ET CASE No... DATE REMARK DESCRIPTION OF THE ORDER Shri Vishwa mohan Bhardwaj, Adv for the Appticant Non appticants are not noticed Appticant CounseI heard. Original RC catled and perused. Appticant Counsel pointed out that though on judgment dated20/01 /20 Defendant No.1 M/s Sahayog Ctean Mitk Private Limited is mention as Defendant No.1 and also as Defendant No.8 Yogesh Patidar is mentioned but under cause titte of the RC No.459/2020 the name of defendant No.1 and defendant No.8 is missing and atso pointed out that defendant No.7 Shyama Patidar is mention under two places at CD No.7 and also at CD No.8 which is wrongty mentioned. And atso pointed out that in judgment para-4 the Applicant Bank awarded pendentelite and future interest @177o p,a. but in RC in place of future interest @0% has been mentioned while there shoutd be as per award @12%. On perusal of the originat recovery certificate it reveats that as pointed out by the Appticant Counsel typographicaI errors are exits under the Recovery certificate which is tiabte to be rectified. Therefore apptication fited by the Appticant Counsel uls26(21of the RDB Act is atlowed. It is order that typographical error as indicated above be corrected under the original Recovery Certificate thereafter corrected RC be sent to the recovery officer for recovery as per rules. As above application is disposed off. (Ra Nlwas Patet) PAGE No. M 22t22 15t07 t22 Presiding officer \