payment and insisted that
the appeal against rejection of the recall
application should be allowed by this
Court. The counsel for the appellant
submitted that
does not press
said petition, disposed of the petition accordingly.
Then, recall application being CR.MA (Recall)
No.29289 ... ordinate Bench vide order
dated 01/12/2017 allowed the recall application and
disposed of SCR.A No.3177 of 2017 as dismissed as
withdrawn
prosecution to
produce the witnesses at any time without filing
any recall application. Inspite of that the
prosecution has not make use of the opportunity
agriculture under Section 143 of 1950, Act restoration/ recall application has been filed which is pending consideration.
23. While further inviting attention towards the averments ... said order is still existing though, according to the NOIDA restoration/ recall application has been filed, thus, it is was always open for them
impugned Order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the CCI rejecting
the application seeking review/recall of the Order dated 06.12.2016 passed ... said application filed by the petitioner company was heard and thereafter,
the CCI by review Order dated 08.08.2018 rejected the application for
review/recall
impugned Order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the CCI rejecting
the application seeking review/recall of the Order dated 06.12.2016 passed ... said application filed by the petitioner company was heard and thereafter,
the CCI by review Order dated 08.08.2018 rejected the application for
review/recall
impugned Order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the CCI rejecting
the application seeking review/recall of the Order dated 06.12.2016 passed ... said application filed by the petitioner company was heard and thereafter,
the CCI by review Order dated 08.08.2018 rejected the application for
review/recall
impugned Order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the CCI rejecting
the application seeking review/recall of the Order dated 06.12.2016 passed ... said application filed by the petitioner company was heard and thereafter,
the CCI by review Order dated 08.08.2018 rejected the application for
review/recall
payment and insisted that
the appeal against rejection of the recall
application should be allowed by this
Court. The counsel for the appellant
submitted that
Counsel for the
applicant that he has filed the present application
for recall of the directions given by this Court in
para ... opinion that the
application filed by the
respondent was an application
for recall of the Order dated
2.9.2003 and not for review. In
Asit Kumar
