This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 773 OF 2005 IN COMPANY APPLICATION NO.231 OF 2001
Mr. Anand K. Harijan ... Applicant
versus
Official Liquidator ... Respondent
Applicant in person.
Ms. A. Razak, Advocate for the Respondent/Official Liquidator.
CORAM : N. A. BRITTO, J.
DATE : 9TH DECEMBER, 2005.
P.C.:
Heard Ms. A. Razak, the learned Counsel on behalf of the Respondent/Official Liquidator.
The application filed by respondent No.2 on 5102005 registered as Miscellaneous Civil Application No.773 of 2005 shall be considered as the reply of respondent No.2 in Company Application No.231 of 2001. The proceedings in this Miscellaneous Civil Application No.773 of 2005 shall be closed. The said application/reply of respondent No.2 shall be
2
considered after respondent Nos.1 and 3 are served.
Respondent No.2 is present in person.
S. O. six weeks.
N. A. BRITTO, J.
RD.,
Anand K. Harijan
Official Liquidator
N. A. Britto
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
