Gujarat High Court
Chanchal Infrastructure Private ... vs Rmc Readymix (India)(A Division Of ... on 7 June, 2016
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt
Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt, A.Y. Kogje
O/OJA/11/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
O.J.APPEAL NO. 11 of 2016
In
COMPANY PETITION NO. 361 of 2015
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (OJ) NO. 236 of 2016
In
O.J.APPEAL NO. 11 of 2016
================================================================
CHANCHAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, THRO
DIRECTOR)....Appellant
Versus
RMC READYMIX (INDIA)(A DIVISION OF PRISM CEMENT LIMITED) &
1....Opponents
================================================================
Appearance:
MS NIYATI K SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant
MR PATHIK M ACHARYA, ADVOCATE for the Opponent No. 2
MR. NIRAV D TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent No. 1
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR for the Opponent No. 2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 07/06/2016
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT) Ms. N.K. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that on account of due deliberation and endavour, now original petitioner has settled the matter with the appellant and therefore, there would be no further requirement of continuing the main matter, in which, there is an order of appointment of provisional liquidator.
Page 1 of 2
HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Wed Jun 08 01:16:24 IST 2016
O/OJA/11/2016 ORDER
Shri Pathik Aacharya, learned advocate appearing for OL has submitted that in view of what had transpired on earlier occasions, the OL has not precipitated the matter even after OL was appointed as the provisional liquidator.
Shri Nirav Trivedi, learned advocate appearing for original petitioner and respondent No. 1 herein concur what is being submitted at bar on behalf of learned counsel for the appellant.
In that view of the matter, Ms. Shah, learned advocate does not press this appeal at this stage with a liberty to approach the learned Company Judge for seeking appropriate order for disposal of main matter as now not survived. Learned advocate appearing for OL submitted that as the OL has not precipitated the things pursuant to notice dated 25.5.2016, the same would not be hereafter done till the learned Company Judge takes up the matter.
In that view of the matter, the OJ Appeal is not pressed and is accordingly disposed of.
Order in OJ Civil Application No. 236 of 2016:
In view of order passed in OJ Appeal, no order in OJ Civil Application and is disposed of accordingly.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) (A.Y. KOGJE, J.) pallav Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Wed Jun 08 01:16:24 IST 2016