The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal concerning the scheme of amalgamation, declining to keep the matter pending as the Supreme Court had already disposed of the identical lis.
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
dssherla
8-app(L) No 426-13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL (L) NO. 426 OF 2013 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1567 OF 2013
Commissioner of Income Tax-7 .. Appellant V/s. Vodafone India Limited Formerly known as Vodafone Essar Limited and anr. .. Respondents.
Mr. Abhay Ahuja for Appellant. Mr. Rohidas Gawde i/b P.B. Anand for Respondent No.1.
CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. AND M.S.SONAK, J.
DATE : 08 SEPTEMBER 2016.
P.C.
1] This appeal is filed challenging the scheme of amalgamation. A similar order from Gujarat High Court was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its order dated 15 April 2015 has dismissed the special leave petition. Since the same lis is arising for our consideration in the matter, we have no reason to keep the appeal pending for consideration.
2] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in terms of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order dated 15 April 2015.
1 of 2
2
dssherla
8-app(L) No 426-13
3] In view of dismissal of the main appeal, the notice motion do not survive and the same is disposed of accordingly.
( CHIEF JUSTICE)
(M.S.SONAK, J.)
2 of 2
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
(Supreme Court 08 April 2015)Relied on¶1
Commissioner of Income Tax-7
Vodafone India Limited
Dr. Manjula Chellur
M.S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
