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]

Bombay High Court

Raksha Kiit Gosher vs Official Liquidator Of Woodland Garde ... on 18 January, 2023

Author: N. J. Jamadar

Bench: N. J. Jamadar

                                                                  29-CPNCP3-2019.DOC

                                                                              Santosh
                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION


                                    CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 3/2019
                                                  IN
SANTOSH                          COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 453 OF 2017
SUBHASH
KULKARNI                                         WITH
Digitally signed by               OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR NO. 21 OF 2016
SANTOSH
SUBHASH
KULKARNI                                         WITH
                               INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 4540 OF 2021
Date: 2023.01.21
10:36:36 +0530


                                                  IN
                                 COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 453 OF 2017

                      Raksha Kirit Gosher                             ...Petitioner
                                           Versus
                      Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay (for
                      M/s. Woodland Garden Cafe) & ors.            ...Respondents
                                                    WITH
                                    INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 2021
                                                    WITH
                                INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 3710 OF 2022
                                                    WITH
                                            RPC (L) NO. 7 OF 2019
                                                     IN
                                  COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 453 OF 2017

                      Mr. Naushad Engineer, for the Official Liquidator.
                      Mr. Atul Damle, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Rashid Khan, i/b
                            Vivek Phadke, for the Petitioner in CNPCP/3/2019.
                      Mr. Ashish Kamat, a/w Mr. Aman Kacheria, Neel Kothari,
                           Twinkle Gadhiya, i/b Pritesh Burad Asso., for
                           Respondent No.10 in CNPCP/3/2019.
                      Mr. Aman Kacheria, a/w Neel Kothari, Ms. Twinkle Gadhiya,
                           i/b Pritesh Burad Asso., for the Applicant in
                           IA/3710/2020 and for Respondent No.10 in
                           IAL/15085/2021 and IAL/4540/2021.
                      Mr. Malcolm Siganporia, a/w Mr. Dharmesh Pandya, i/b
                           Ashwin Pandya and Asso., for the Proposed Intervenor in
                           IAL/1615/2023.
                      Ms. Sheetal Shah, a/w Ms. Dimple Bitra, i/b Mehta and
                           Girdharlal, for Respondent No.6 in IAL/15085/2021.


                                                   1/3
                                                   29-CPNCP3-2019.DOC

                                   CORAM:     N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                   DATED :    18th JANUARY, 2023
PC:-

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. By an order dated 21st December, 2022 Contempt Petition was directed to be heard peremptorily.

3. Mr. Kamat, the learned Counsel for respondent Nos.10 and 11, the alleged Contemnors, submits that respondent No.10 had affirmed an affidavit on 18th April, 2019 and its copy had been served on the petitioner.

4. The said affidavit, however, does not seem to have been filed in the Court, and rest of the parties including the Official Liquidator have not been served.

5. Mr. Kamat seeks to reaffirm the said affidavit and file it in the Registry and serve its copies on the parties within a couple of days.

Leave granted.

Let the reaffirmed affidavit be filed in the Registry and its copies served on the parties to the Contempt Petition and Official Liquidator within a week's time.

6. The petitioner is at liberty to file an affidavit-in-rejoinder to the affidavit-in-reply to be filed by respondent No.10 within a 2/3 29-CPNCP3-2019.DOC period of two weeks of being served with the copy of the reaffirmed affidavit.

7. Mr. Siganporia, the learned Counsel for the intervenor, submits that the intervenor has taken out intervention application bearing Interim Application (L) No.1615 of 2023.

Let the intervention application be filed in the Registry within a week's time.

8. There is consensus amongst the parties that the Contempt Petition and Review Petition (L) No.7 of 2019 be heard first, followed by rest of the applications.

9. In the event the parties have not completed the pleadings in the Interim Application and Review Petition, the same be completed within the period of two weeks.

10. The parties are permitted to take inspection of the record.

11. Stand over to 15th February, 2023.

12. To be listed alongwith Interim Application (L) No.1615 of 2023.

13. The learned Counsel for the applicant in Interim Application (L) No.1615/2023 undertakes to serve all the parties with the interim application.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 3/3