Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9519 OF2019(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.11618 of 2017) DAHIBEN versus ARVINDBHAI KALYANJI BHANUSALI (GAJRA)(D) THR LRS & ORS. Appellant Respondents JUDGMENT INDU MALHOTRA, J.1. The present Civil Appeal has been filed to challenge the impugned Judgment and Order dated 19.10.2016 passed by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court, which affirmed the Order of the Trial Court, allowing the application filed by Defendant Nos. 2 and 3/Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 herein under Order VII Rule 11(d), CPC holding that the suit filed by the Appellant and Respondent Nos. 9 to 13 herein (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiffs) was barred by limitation.2. The subject-matter of the present proceedings pertains to a plot of agricultural land of old tenure, admeasuring approximately 1 8701 sq. mtrs. in Revenue Survey No.610, Block No.573 situated in village Mota Varachha, Sub-District Surat (hereinafter referred t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.541 OF2020REEPAK KANSAL ..PETITIONER VERSUS SECRETARYGENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The petitioner, who is an Advocate practicing in this Court, has filed the writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India against various officers of the Registry of this Court and the Union of India. Prayer has been made to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to give preference to the cases filed by influential lawyers/ petitioners, law firms, etc. Prayer has been made to direct the respondents to give equal treatment to the cases filed by ordinary lawyers/ petitioners and not to point out unnecessary defects, refund the excess court fee and other charges, and not to tag the cases without order or direction of the Court with other cases. A prayer has also been made to direct the S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.9340 OF2019ARUNA OSWAL APPELLANT PANKAJ OSWAL & ORS. VS. WITH RESPONDENTS CIVIL APPEAL NO.9399 OF2019AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.9401 OF2019ARUN MISHRA, J.JUDGMENT1 These appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14.11.2019 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, (for short the NCLAT) in Company Appeal (AT) No.411 of 2018, thereby affirming the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (for short the NCLT) concerning maintainability of the applications filed under sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2 2. The case is the outcome of a family tussle. Late Mr. Abhey Kumar Oswal, during his lifetime, held as many as 5,35,3,960 shares in M/s. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd., a listed company. He breathed his last on 29.3.2016 in Russia. On or about 18.6.2015, Mr. Abhey Kumar Oswal filed a nomination according to sec...
Tag this Judgment!