The High Court of Bombay Company Court dismissed Company Petition No.318 of 2015 as withdrawn because the petitioner failed to take steps for advertisement following a settlement between the parties.
None.
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.
cp-318-15(34).doc
1/1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY AND ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.318 OF 2015
M/s Union Roadways Ltd.
..Petitioner
Vs.
M/s Ispat Infrastructure (India) Ltd
..Respondent
Ms. Kevana Dagli I/b A. M. Saraogi for Petitioner None for Respondent
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 24th JULY 2019
P.C.:
1 Ms Dagli states that parties have settled the matter and as recorded in first paragraph of order dated 25th February 2019 in Appeal (L) No.65 of 2019, petitioner has not taken any steps for the purpose of advertisement as directed by Company Judge in view of the settlement talks between the parties.
2 Therefore, petition dismissed as withdrawn.
(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
Meera Jadhav
M/s Union Roadways Ltd.
M/s Ispat Infrastructure (India) Ltd
K.R. SHRIRAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
