proforma defendant. The
defendant no.1 is a company owned by Sarda group. The defendant no.2 is a
joint-venture company. The proforma defendant ... proforma
defendant. The defendant nos. 3, 4 and 5 claimed to be the directors of the
proforma defendant and the defendant
2013 has been added only as a proforma defendant. By the selfsame
impugned order the application of the petitioners in CM(M) No.211/2013 ... a proforma defendant. Sh. Sudarshan Kumar
Jain however claims that he should be impleaded as an effective contesting
defendant and not only a proforma defendant
payment that has
been made by the proforma defendant, because proforma defendant
was neither a partner of the firm, nor in anyway concerned with ... firm
and continue with the project.
Case of the Proforma Defendant No.3
15. Proforma Defendant No.3 filed written statement stating that
Samir Kumar
payment that has
been made by the proforma defendant, because proforma defendant
was neither a partner of the firm, nor in anyway concerned with ... firm
and continue with the project.
Case of the Proforma Defendant No.3
15. Proforma Defendant No.3 filed written statement stating that
Samir Kumar
proforma defendant' and there are no restrictions attached to a
proforma defendant in law and that therefore there is nothing in law to
indicate ... that a proforma defendant cannot lead evidence. That there is no
estoppel against law and it is permissible for parties to raise inconsistent
pleas
proforma defendant
in the name of Principal Defendant and the Principal Defendant
shall, immediately on receipt of the cheque issued by the proforma
defendant, issued ... Case of Bokaro Steel Plant (Proforma Defendant)
6. So far as proforma defendant is concerned, they also filed a
separate written statement and asserted that
proforma defendant, the proforma defendant cannot be seen to be
independent of the plaintiffs notwithstanding the proforma defendant being
a separate juristic person. According ... directors qua the proforma defendant, it is for the
proforma defendant to sue the persons who have allegedly wronged the
proforma defendant and the plaintiffs
proforma
8
defendant no.5. The defendant no.1 is the husband of defendant no.2 and
father of defendant no.3 and proforma defendant ... grandson of the defendant no.1.
The defendant no.1 is also the maternal grandfather of proforma defendant
no.6. The defendant no.1 also
proforma
8
defendant no.5. The defendant no.1 is the husband of defendant no.2 and
father of defendant no.3 and proforma defendant ... grandson of the defendant no.1.
The defendant no.1 is also the maternal grandfather of proforma defendant
no.6. The defendant no.1 also
defendant no. 1
and proforma defendant which was cancelled and/or
terminated by the proforma defendant and pursuant to
several notices the said proforma defendant ... defendant
No.1 and proforma defendant which was cancelled and/or
terminated by the proforma defendant and pursuant to several
notices the said proforma defendant
