Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Housing & Urban Dev.Corp.Ltd. vs M.C.D. on 31 March, 2014
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
&
ITEM NO.201 COURT NO.1 SECTION IIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 224 OF 2008 IN Civil Appeal No.6645/1999
HOUSING & URBAN DEV.CORP.LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
M.C.D. & ANR. Alleged Contemnors/Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for permission to file additional documents)
(For final disposal)
Date: 31/03/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Parag Tripathi,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Atul Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Annam D.N. Rao,Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Agarwal,Adv.
Ms. Neelam Jain,Adv.
Mr. A. Venkatesh,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjib Sen,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Dev J.Roy,Adv.
Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The contempt petition is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
[ Madhu Bala ] [ Savita Sainani ] Court Master Assistant Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 224 OF 2008 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6645 OF 1999 HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD. ... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS M.C.D. & ANR. ...ALLEGED CONTEMNORS/RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Heard learned senior counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material.
On going through the Order dated 21.02.2000 and the final order dated 13.12.2000 as well as the details furnished in the form of Annexure P-6, we are of the view that it is not a case of contempt as projected before us. The contempt petition is dismissed. However, the aggrieved party is at liberty to pursue their remedy if the same is available under law.
In view of the pendency of the above proceedings in this Court till this date while considering limitation, the same may be taken note of.
..................CJI.
[P. SATHASIVAM] NEW DELHI 31st MARCH, 2014 ...................J. [RANJAN GOGOI]