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 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

M/S Pennar Industries Limited Formerly ... vs M/S Deify Infrastructures Limited on 25 February, 2022

Author: Arup Kumar Goswami

Bench: Arup Kumar Goswami

                                              1


                                                                                NAFR
                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                ARBR No. 36 of 2019
      M/s Pennar Industries Limited Formerly Known As M/s Pennar
      Engineered Building Systems Limited Formely Known As M/s. Pennar
      Engineered Building Systems Limited, Through -Mr. A. Bhaskar Rao
      (Authorized Signatory). Registered Office At - 9th Floor (West Wing),
      Dhflvc Silicon Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad-500084, Telangana State,
      District : Hyderabad, Telangana
                                                                 ---- Petitioner
                                        Versus
      M/s Deify Infrastructures Limited Through- Managing Director, Registered
      Office At- Siltara Growth Centre, Industrial Area, Siltara, Raipur,
      Chhattisgarh- 493111. Also At- M/s Deify Infrastructures Limited C/o
      Jayaswal Neco Industries Limited, Siltara Growth Center, Siltara, Raipur,
      Chhattisgarh- 493111, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
                                                              ---- Respondent

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.02.2022 Heard Mr. Atanu Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ashish Surana, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent.

2. Mr. Ghosh submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled during the pendency of this application and, therefore, there is no surviving cause of action.

3. In that view of the matter, the present petition is disposed of as infructuous.

Sd/-

(Arup Kumar Goswami) Chief Justice Hem