Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M/S. Rose Island Engg. Works (P) Ltd. vs State Of West Bengal on 13 February, 2018
Bench: Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MA.22/2017 IN SLP (CRL) No. 3731/2011
M/S. ROSE ISLAND ENGG. WORKS (P) LTD. & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION M.A.NO. 22 OF 2017 IN SR 3731/2011 FOR DIRECTION
REG. AMENDMENT OF CAUSE TITLE IN I.A. ON IA 47829/2017)
Date : 13-02-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR (N.P.)
For Respondent(s) Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR
Ms. Nandini Sen,Adv.
For Mr. Chanchal Kr. Ganguli,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
This application is filed by the applicant/Respondent No.2 with the following prayer:-
a) be directed regarding the cause title in terms of the facts mentioned in Para 3 and 4 of the present application.
Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the application read as under:-
Signature Not Verified“3. That the Respondent No.2 Company in the Digitally signed by NARENDRA PRASAD Date: 2018.02.17 12:46:39 IST abovementioned Special Leave Petition was Reason: registered as 'Madan Grey Iron Casting Private 1 Limited' with the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal. Copy of the Certificate of Incorporation No.35819 of 1983 in Form I.R. dated 08.02.1983 is annexed as Annexure B.
4. That the petitioner when filed Special Leave Petition missed the word 'Private' in the Memo of parties of SLP intentionally or deliberately or inadvertently reasons best known to them and finally the name of the Respondent No.2 was written “Madan Grey Iron Casting Limited”.
It is pertinent to note that the Respondent No.2 filed his Counter Affidavit to the Special Leave Petition and it was specifically mentioned in Para 1 of the Counter Affidavit “that I am the Director of the Respondent No.2, a Private Limited Company”.
Despite service of notice, none appears for the non-applicant/petitioners.
Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that they have no say in the matter, since it is a dispute between the parties. Since, none appeared for the non-applicant/petitioners despite service of notice, this application, as prayed for, is allowed.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (RENU DIWAN)
COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
2