Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: driplex in The Chief General Manager(Contracts) ... vs Driplex Water Engineering Ltd & Anr on 29 January, 2020Matching Fragments
13. In any view, the Schedule of Assets relied upon by Neyveli do not reflect that the value of equipment in the hands of Driplex as on 31.03.2011, exceeds ₹2 crores. As noticed above, the investment/equipment and plant and machinery, as reflected in the registration certificate issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi on 09.12.2011, indicates the said value to be ₹86 lakhs."
17. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner had submitted that when the learned Single Judge had observed in para 15 of the impugned judgment that the MSEF Council was required to examine the preliminary objection taken by the appellant/petitioner questioning its jurisdiction to entertain a reference under Section 18 of the Act, which it had failed to do, though in para 1 of the order dated 16.6.2016, the MSEF Council had duly noted the said objection, then it was incumbent upon the learned Single Judge to have remanded the matter back to the Council instead of adjudicating the same on merits.