Disposed

Mpil Corporation Ltd. v. Union of India and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC4 Oct 2007WP/2269/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a demand and recovery order. The Court directed the Government to provide authenticated documents within seven days and stayed the impugned recovery order for thirty days pending party applications on receipt of such documents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to seek documents from Respondent No. 3 within 7 days; recovery order stayed for 30 days from receipt of documents.

Mpil Corporation Ltd. Vs Union of India… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

SAS

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION (LOD) NO.1966 OF 2007

¶5

 MPIL Corporation Ltd. (Formerly
 known as Mather & Plat (India) Ltd. ..Petitioner.

¶6

 V/s.

¶7

 Union of India & Anr. ..Respondents.

¶8

 Mr.D.B.Shroff, senior counsel i/b. Sonal Doshi & Co.
 for petitioner.

¶9

 Mr.P.S.Jetly with A.S.Rao for respondents.

¶10

CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.

¶11

DATED : 4TH OCTOBER, 2007.

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

 When the petition came up for hearing, on

¶14

 behalf of the respondents, learned counsel produced an
 order dated 20th November, 2001. It is pointed out
 that the demand and recovery is in respect of this
 order and not the order dated 16/2/2006 which is
 Exhibit-B to the petition and as amended by the
 corrigendum dated 29/3/2006. Considering the above,
 the petition as filed would not be maintainable in so
 far as demand which is sought to be quashed.

¶15

 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the

¶16

 said order has not been served upon them. It is the

¶17

 case of the respondent that a copy has been served.
 However, the respondent to make available an

¶18

 - = : 2 : = -

¶19

 authenticated copy of the order to the petitioner. If
 the original order is not received by the petitioner,
 it would be open to the petitioner to prefer an appeal
 / or any other proceedings on the authenticated copy of
 the order. This is subject to whatever rights
 available to the petitioner.

¶20

 3. Considering the above and to meet the ends
 of justice, this petition is disposed of by giving
 following directions.

¶21

 i) Petitioner to apply to the respondent No.3 for
 whatever documents he seeks to rely upon. ii)
 Respondent No.3 to make available all such
 documents within 7 days thereafter if the same
 are in their possession and on record. iii)
 Petitioner on receipt of the documents made
 available by the respondent No.3 to take
 whatever steps in law which they are entitled.
 The order of recovery which is sought to be
 challenged in this proceedings not to be acted
 upon and till the expiry of a period of 30 days
 from the receipt of the documents from the
 respondent No.3.

¶22

 4. With the above directions the petition is
 disposed of.

¶23

 - = : 3 : = -

¶24

(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)

Mpil Corporation Ltd. v. Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mpil Corporation Ltd. v. Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.I.T.-Iii, Bombay. Vs Ramnord Research Laboratories Pvt.Ltd.

thee commissioner of income-tax,centrali,mum Vs m/s regal shoes

The Commissioner OFDINCOME-TAX-CITY-16 Vs Shri Rakesh Sekhsaria

M/S. Orion Commodities and Services Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

union of india and Anr. Vs m/s indus ind media communication Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

commissioner of central excise-thane-i Vs m/s shree ram steel rolling mills