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

L And T Hydrocarbon Engineering Ltd. And ... vs The Union Of India Through The ... on 23 July, 2024

Author: K.R. Shriram

Bench: K.R. Shriram

                                               1/2                          908-WP-9404-2019.doc




     PURTI              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
     PRASAD
     PARAB                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
  Digitally signed by
  PURTI PRASAD
  PARAB
  Date: 2024.07.24
  11:02:19 +0530                WRIT PETITION NO. 9404 OF 2019

Larsen & Toubro Ltd.
(Formerly known as L And T
Hydrocarbon Engineering Ltd.) and Anr.                              ....Petitioners
      V/s.
The Union of India
Through The Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue and Ors.                                      ...Respondents

                                     ----
Mr. V. Sridharan, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Sriram Sridharan for Petitioners.
Mr. Ram Ochani for Respondent No.2.
Ms. Neeta Masurkar a/w Mr. Ram Ochani for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4.
                                     ----

                                            CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &
                                                    JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : 23rd JULY 2024 P.C. :

1. At the outset Mr. Ochani states that cost as directed by this court in Paragraph No.7 of the order dated 15 th July 2024 has been paid.

Mr. Ochani tenders copy of the receipt which is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Copy of the receipt has also been given to Mr.Sridharan.

2. We have seen the affidavit in reply of Ms. Sucheta Sreejesh affirmed on 20th July 2024 on behalf of Respondent No.2. In the affidavit the said affiant has given address of Chennai. It does not, however, state she resides at that address or works for gain or carries on business at that Purti Parab ::: Uploaded on - 24/07/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2024 12:52:21 ::: 2/2 908-WP-9404-2019.doc address. But the affidavit in reply is notarized in Bangalore and it also states solemnly affirmed at Mumbai. Therefore, it is quite clear that the affidavit is not proper and has not even bothered to read the same. We reject the same.

3. Should Respondent No.2 wish to oppose the petition, a fresh affidavit shall be filed and copy served on or before 25 th July 2024. Purely by way of indulgence we are not imposing cost on the officer for today's adjournment. The officer is warned that she shall read the affidavit line by line and ensure that there are no such mistakes.

4. Stand over to 29th July 2024.

(JITENDRA JAIN, J.)                                        (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)




Purti Parab



        ::: Uploaded on - 24/07/2024               ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2024 12:52:21 :::