Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Riverfront Properties Private Limited vs Idbi Bank Ltd & 3....Opponent(S) on 7 February, 2014

Author: Ravi R.Tripathi

Bench: Ravi R.Tripathi, Mohinder Pal

            O/OJA/2/2014                                 ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                           O.J.APPEAL NO. 2 of 2014
               In MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 187 of 2012
                In COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 414 of 2007
                    In COMPANY PETITION NO. 21 of 1984

================================================================
      RIVERFRONT PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED....Appellant(s)
                           Versus
               IDBI BANK LTD & 3....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR AS VAKIL, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
================================================================

           CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
                  and
                  HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL

                               Date : 07/02/2014


                                ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI) Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Soparkar with senior advocate Mr.S.I.Nanavati and Mr.A.S.Vakil for the appellant. Learned advocate invited the attention of the Court to the gist of events, more particularly from item No.20 onwards. After doing that, learned advocate submitted the following questions of law arising in this matter:

"1. Whether the Company Court has a power, under Company Court Rules and in particular under Rule 9 thereof, to recall an order in a proceedings which are not review proceedings?
Page 1 of 2
O/OJA/2/2014 ORDER
2. Whether even if the Court has such a power the same is not required to be exercised within the period of limitation?
3. Whether, even if the period of limitation is snot applicable such a power is not required to be exercised within a reasonable period?
4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Applicants had made out any case for recall of the earlier order?
5. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Applicant had by their conduct not disentitled themselves from seeking the relief of recall of the earlier order?
6. Whether the Company Court was right in passing the impugned order when the matter was at the stage of recall and:
(a) Giving the findings on merits though the same as expressly given up by the Applicants?
(b) While setting aside the order for rehearing the findings are given on merits so as to prejudice the very arguments of the Opponents on merits?"

The matter requires consideration. ADMIT.

(RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) (KMGThilake) Page 2 of 2