Disposed

Darshan Dev Duggal v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Jun 2007APPW/144/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court modified paragraph 5 of a previous order to correctly identify respondent no.4 as the registrar and share transfer agent of a company. The applicant was identified as an advocate who made a false statement. The application is disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Paragraph 5 of the order dated 22nd March 2007 is corrected to include 'Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.' regarding respondent no.4's role.

Darshan Dev Duggal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.144 OF 2007
 IN
 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2019 OF 2006

¶4

 Darshan Dev Duggal .. Applicant.
 Vs.

¶5

 State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents.

¶6

 Applicant present in person.
 Mr.Manish Kenia i/b N.K.Dayashandan for respondent
 no.4.

¶7

 Mr.C.U.Singh i/b Sanjay Udeshi for respondent no.5.
 Mrs.U.V.Kejariwal APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI &
D.B.BHOSALE, JJ.
DATED : 6TH JUNE, 2007.
P.C.:

¶9

 . Heard the applicant in person, learned
 counsel for respondent nos.4 and 5 and learned A.P.P.
 for the State.

¶10

 2. In this application, the applicant has made
 the following prayers:

¶11

 "(a) That a complaint U/s.193 I.P.C. be
 filed against advocate Sanjay Udeshi for
 knowingly making a false statement before
 this Hon’ble Court on 22nd March, 2007 that
 he was appearing for Sun Pharmaceuticals
 Industries Ltd.

¶12

 (b) That the paragraph No.5 of this
 Honourable Court’s order dated 22nd March,
 2007 be corrected as under:-

¶13

 "The learned counsel for respondent 5
 states that since the said shares
 which are presently lying with
 respondent 4, who is the registrar
 and share transfer agent of Sun
 Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.
 stand in the name of the petitioner,
 they shall be delivered to the
 petitioner at the address of the
 petitioner mentioned in the cause
 title of the petition after a period

¶14

:2:

¶15

 of eight weeks from today."

¶16

 . Though the applicant has made the aforesaid
 prayers he pressed prayer clause (b) only. He
 invited our attention to paragraph 5 of the order
 dated 22.3.2007 passed in civil writ petition no.2019
 of 2006 and submitted that respondent no.4 is the

¶17

 registrar and share transer agent of Sun
 Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. and not only the
 share transfer agent of respondent no.5 as recorded
 therein. The learned counsel for respondent nos.4
 and 5 have no objection for making such

¶18

 modifications/corrections. In the circumstances the
 modified paragraph 5 of the order dated 22.3.2007
 shall read thus:

¶19

 "5. The learned counsel for respondent
 no.5 states that since the said shares which
 are presently lying with respondent no.4, who
 is the registrar and share transfer agent of
 Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. stand in
 the name of the petitioner, they shall be
 delivered to the petitioner at the address of
 the petitioner mentioned in the cause title
 of the petition immediately after a period of
 eight weeks from today. His statement is
 accepted."

¶20

 3. The order dated 22.3.2007 passed in civil
 writ petition no.2019 of 2006 stands modified only to
 the extent as aforestated. The application, is
 disposed of.

¶21

 (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.)

¶22

:3:

¶23

 (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)

Darshan Dev Duggal v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Dev Duggal v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suman Sambhaji Shinde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S. Avlon Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chandrakala P. Gouda and Anr.

Buwaji Sahadeo Hazare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jamila Iqbal Husain Sayyed Ali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Darshan Dev Duggal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hanumant Jagannath Dolas Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.