Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Chief General Manager (Engg), Project ... vs Ncc-Smc (Jv) (M/S Nagarjuna ... on 24 October, 2016
Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.7 SECTION XIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. 1/2016 in
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 504/2016
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29/12/2015
in CC No. 1546/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra
Pradesh)
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (ENGG), PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION CIRCLE -III AND ORS Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
NCC-SMC (JV) (M/S NAGARJUNA CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY LTD , JOINT VENTURE WITH
M/S SMC INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD AND ORS. Respondent(s)
(for recall/clarification of court's order and office report)
WITH
I.A. NO.1/2016 in
SLP(C) No. 510/2016
(With appln.(s) for clarification/modification of court's order and
Interim Relief and Office Report)
Date : 24/10/2016 These applications were called on for hearing
today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar,Adv.
Mr. T. Sudhakar Reddy, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Chaudhary,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Signature Not Verified The petitioners approached this Court aggrieved by Digitally signed by RAJNI MUKHI the Date: 2016.10.25 17:21:05 IST contempt proceedings initiated by the High Court of Reason:
judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telengana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in CC No. 1546 of 2015.
- 2 -
During the pendency of the petition, this Court on 27.09.2016 passed the following order:
“The learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction, submits that the entire amounts covered by the 1.2% deducted from VAT can be paid to the respondents. The petitioners may do so within a period of two weeks from today.
In view of the submission, as above, the contempt proceedings initiated by the respondents as against the petitioners shall be deferred.
Post after three weeks.” We are informed that the said amount has been paid and the same is not in dispute.
In view of the above, we find that there is no need for continuing contempt proceedings in the High Court and there is no need to recall the order dated 18.01.2016 of this Court.
Accordingly, I.A.(s) No. 1/2016 stands disposed of.
(Rajni Mukhi) (Renu Diwan)
SR. P.A. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR