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 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Dbs Bank India Limited vs Religare Finvest Limited on 12 February, 2025

Author: Surya Kant

Bench: Surya Kant

     ITEM NO.3                                 COURT NO.3                      SECTION XIV

                                     S U P R E M E C O U R T O F            I N D I A
                                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

               Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                   No(s).     2399/2025

     [Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 03-12-2024 in IA
     No. 12112/2018 in CS (Comm) No. 940/2018 passed by the High Court
     of Delhi at New Delhi]

     DBS BANK INDIA LIMITED                                                       Petitioner(s)

                                                           VERSUS

     RELIGARE FINVEST LIMITED & ORS.                                              Respondent(s)

     (IA No. 23328/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT

IA No. 25867/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 12-02-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sushmita Gandhi, Adv.
Mr. Malak Manish Bhatt, AOR Ms. Vatsala Pant, Adv.
Ms. Samridhi, Adv.
Mr. Aman Marwah, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Devashish Das, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
1. We have heard Mr. Mukul Rohatgi and Mr. Jayant Bhushan, learned senior counsel on behalf of the petitioner – Bank. Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel, who appears on Caveat on Signature Not Verified behalf of the first respondent, has also been heard. Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2025.02.14 10:09:16 IST Reason:
2. Having regard to the ground taken in the application under 1 Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 moved by the petitioner – defendant and the subsequent steps taken by the respondent - plaintiff to cure those defects, we do not deem it necessary to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.
3. However, the petitioner – defendant Bank shall be at liberty to raise all the objections against maintainability of Suit including the ground of suppression of material facts, before the trial court at an appropriate stage and it goes without saying that all such objections will be decided in accordance with law.
4. With the above, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NITIN TALREJA)                                               (PREETHI T.C.)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR




                                           2