The High Court of Bombay held that the writ petition filed by Jindal Drugs Ltd. was infructuous as the adjudication order sought to be challenged had already been passed. The petition was consequently dismissed.
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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2346 OF 2007
Jindal Drugs Ltd. Vs.
The Union of India & Ors.
..Petitioner
..Respondents
Mr.R.Dada, Senior Advocate with Mr.Prakash Shah i/b.P.D.S.Legal for the Petitioner. Mr.R.V.Desai, Senior Advocate with Mr.A.S.Rao and Mr.Y.S.Bhate and Ms.Heena Shah for the Respondents.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATE : 27TH APRIL, 2007
P.C.
| 1. | H | eard the learned | Senior Counse | l for the | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Petitioner | and | the | learned S |
enior | Counsel | for | the |
| Respondents | . | Mr.Dada, | the l |
earned | Senior | Counsel | for |
| the | Petitioner | fairly | states that |
as |
of | date, | this |
| Petition | has | become | infructuous, | since | by | this | |
| Petition, | the | Petitioner | had | sought | a | relief | that |
| Respondent | No.3 | should | be | restrained | from |
adjud | icating |
| the n |
otice |
to show |
cause | dated | 13th |
Marc | h,2007, |
however, the adjudication order has already been
passed on 3rd April,2007.
the case, as the above Petition has become infructuous
as of date, the Petition stands dismissed.
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
Jindal Drugs Ltd.
The Union of India
Ors.
DR. S. Radhakrishnan
V. C. Daga
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
