Dismissed two company petitions for non-availability of instructions from petitioners despite multiple listings, holding them cannot be kept pending indefinitely.
Both company petitions are 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.
22.cp.222.11.doc
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO. 222 OF 2011
Manoj L. Chaurasia and another.....Petitioners
Versus
Game King Private Limited.....Respondents
WITH
COMPANY PETITION NO. 224 OF 2011
Manoj L. Chaurasia and another.....Petitioners
Versus
Game King Private Limited.....Respondents
____________
Mr. Ajit Shinde i/b M/s. Halai & Co. for the Petitioners in both
petitions.
Mr. Atul Singh i/b D. R. Shah for the Respondents.
CORAM: G. S. PATEL, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 5, 2014.
P.C.:
1. Learned Advocate for the petitioners in both the petitions states that despite his every effort, and numerous attempts, the petitioners have not responded with instructions. He is left with no choice but to seek a discharge. Even this is difficult because of the non-cooperative attitude and approach of the petitioners.
1 of 2
22.cp.222.11.doc
2. These petitions have been pending for admission since 2011. They have been listed no less than 24 times, and cannot be kept pending indefinitely. Both petitions are dismissed.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
2 of 2
Manoj L. Chaurasia
Game King Private Limited
G. S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court