- 1 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REVIEW PETITION NO.253 OF 2026 BETWEEN: DIPAK THAKUR AGED 57 YEARS, S/O DR. DS THAKUR 152, 2ND FLOOR, DEFENCE ENCLAVE, GEDLAHALLI, HENNUR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 077. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.DIPAK THAKUR, PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: SUNITA THAKUR AGED 57 YEARS DAULAT RAM KHACHIDigitally signed 152, 1ST FLOOR,by G SHREERAKSHA DEFENCE ENCLAVE, Location: HIGH GEDLAHALLI, HENNUR ROAD, COURT OF BANGALORE 560 077. KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW/RECONSIDER THE RESERVED ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 17 APRIL 2026 BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.37271/2025. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL ORDER This review petition is filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC by the petitioner (party-in-person) seeking correction of the typographical errors crept in the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025, which is dismissed on 17.04.2026.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner (party-in-person) had filed W.P.No.37271/2025 before this Court. After hearing both the parties, the said writ petition was dismissed on 17.04.2026. In the said order, few typographical errors were crept in as follows:- (i) At paragraph No.4 in page No.3 “Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that…”; (ii) At paragraph No.5 in page No.4 “Per contra respondent has objection” and; (iii) At paragraph No.6 in page No.5 “Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties”. - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR 3. Accepting the submissions made by the petitioner (party-in-person), typographical errors are corrected as follows:- (i) At paragraph No.4 in page No.3 “Learned counsel for the petitioner…”, is corrected as “Petitioner (party-in-person)...”, (ii) At paragraph No.5 in page No.4 “Per contra respondent has objection”, is corrected as “Per contra, respondent has objected” and; (iii) At paragraph No.6 in page No.5 “Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties” is corrected as “Heard petitioner (party-in-person) and learned counsel for the respondent”. 4. The aforesaid corrections shall be carried out in the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025 dated 17.04.2026. - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR 5. Registry is directed to issue fresh certified copy of the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025 dated 17.04.2026 at free of cost to the parties. Ordered accordingly.

SD/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

- 1 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REVIEW PETITION NO.253 OF 2026 BETWEEN: DIPAK THAKUR AGED 57 YEARS, S/O DR. DS THAKUR 152, 2ND FLOOR, DEFENCE ENCLAVE, GEDLAHALLI, HENNUR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 077. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.DIPAK THAKUR, PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: SUNITA THAKUR AGED 57 YEARS DAULAT RAM KHACHIDigitally signed 152, 1ST FLOOR,by G SHREERAKSHA DEFENCE ENCLAVE, Location: HIGH GEDLAHALLI, HENNUR ROAD, COURT OF BANGALORE 560 077. KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW/RECONSIDER THE RESERVED ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 17 APRIL 2026 BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.37271/2025. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL ORDER This review petition is filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC by the petitioner (party-in-person) seeking correction of the typographical errors crept in the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025, which is dismissed on 17.04.2026.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner (party-in-person) had filed W.P.No.37271/2025 before this Court. After hearing both the parties, the said writ petition was dismissed on 17.04.2026. In the said order, few typographical errors were crept in as follows:- (i) At paragraph No.4 in page No.3 “Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that…”; (ii) At paragraph No.5 in page No.4 “Per contra respondent has objection” and; (iii) At paragraph No.6 in page No.5 “Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties”. - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR 3. Accepting the submissions made by the petitioner (party-in-person), typographical errors are corrected as follows:- (i) At paragraph No.4 in page No.3 “Learned counsel for the petitioner…”, is corrected as “Petitioner (party-in-person)...”, (ii) At paragraph No.5 in page No.4 “Per contra respondent has objection”, is corrected as “Per contra, respondent has objected” and; (iii) At paragraph No.6 in page No.5 “Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties” is corrected as “Heard petitioner (party-in-person) and learned counsel for the respondent”. 4. The aforesaid corrections shall be carried out in the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025 dated 17.04.2026. - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:35209 RP No. 253 of 2026 HC-KAR 5. Registry is directed to issue fresh certified copy of the order passed in W.P.No.37271/2025 dated 17.04.2026 at free of cost to the parties. Ordered accordingly.

SD/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5