Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The matter came up before the Bombay High Court pursuant to a Praecipe for Speaking to the Minutes of the Order dated 16th October 2026 in a Commercial Arbitration Petition. The Petitioner, a co-operative housing society, sought correction of certain inadvertent omissions, alterations and typographical errors that had crept into the said Order.
The Court considered the proposed corrections set out by learned Counsel for the Petitioner, which included rectification of the completion date in Paragraph 10, amendment to the description of emails in Paragraph 12, correction of a case citation from a Writ Petition to an Arbitration Petition number in Paragraph 23, correction of a respondent's name in a cited judgment in Paragraph 23, addition of further judicial precedents as items (10) to (14) in Paragraph 23, and replacement of the table in Paragraph 57 setting out prayer clauses and corresponding judicial precedents with a corrected version.
The corrections to the table in Paragraph 57 related to the judicial precedents cited against entries 1, 2, 4, 12, 13 and 14, with the prayer clauses and all remaining entries being retained as originally stated in the Order of 16th October 2026.
Catchwords:
arbitration · co-operative housing society · redevelopment · speaking to minutes · correction of order · typographical errors · transit rent · statutory dues · interim relief · development agreement
Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's
judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
