Disposed

In the Matter of M/S Hira Steels Ltd. v. Union of India and Others

Chhattisgarh HC28 Apr 2010WP/6084/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a liberty to the petitioner to file another writ petition to incorporate new grounds and ancillary reliefs not pressed in an earlier 2005 amendment application, and accordingly disposed of the present writ petition without hearing the IA.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner given liberty to file another writ petition for new grounds; current petition disposed of.

In the Matter of M/S Hira Steels Ltd. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

/y% i 'lte^. 1

¶3

^ s:t. /^ ^ .<s$, fcu< .^^^ ^^v^

¶4

DiyiSiON BENCH

¶5

i'BLE SHRi RAJEEVGUPTA, C.J.
HON'BLE SHR! SUNIL KUMAR SSNHA. J

¶6

Writ Pe	titlon No.6084of200i M/s Hira Steeis Ltd., 720/1, Rawabhata t.^_^J: .^i.B.^i A "..",—O^:,-.,,.. //^L.,!!-,^.L^:-..-f.«..L.,<br>ijiUtU3>uial M.lcfid n,teipui, ^ririifcii.U^yafllj
1.	Unlon of Indla through Secretarx.'. Ministry' of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Deihi 110001
2	Central Board of Excise & Customs, North Btock, Nevv Deihi 110 001
3	The Commissloner of Central Excise, Hsad Qusrters, Tlksra Psra, Dhamtari toad, Raipur (CG)
4	The Assistant Commissioner of Centrat Excise, Central Excise Building, Civil Lin63; Rsipur(CG)
5	Superintendent of Central Excise, o. O (^!,,ij ! ;n ^••^!*" /^/"t Range- 2, Civii Llnes, Kaipur (CGJ

¶7

ititiort under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of lndi< Shri Ashlsh Shrivastava, counsel for the petltioner Shri Bhisma Kinger, Standing Counsel for the resDondents. <90ih Anr'I ^n'in's ^Aw i-»|^iai, Av iV| The followina order of the Court was passed bv Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

¶8

"ill

¶9

Learned counsel for the parties are heard on IA No.2/201 0, a petition for amendment In the writ petition.

¶10

The petitioner prior to the filing of IA No.2/2010 seekirsa amendment in the writ petition had flied another application for amendment, which came to be registered as iA No.1/2007. The said application, for the reasons best known SQ the petitloner was not pressed and as such, was dlsmissed accordingly vide order dated 06.05.2009.

¶11

The application Tor amendment (!A No.2/2010) runs Into 9 pages^andthe petitioner^seeks to incorporate several arcunds running into almost 7 pages in the writ petitlon filed in the year 2005.

¶12

In our opinion, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to fi!e another writ petition for the reiiefs sought in this writ petitlon and other anciliary retiefs by Incorporating those grounds also, which are now sought to be incorporated by way of amendment in She present writ petition.

¶13

Wlth the liberi:y to the petitioner of filing another writ petition for the reliefs sought by the petitioner in this writ petition and other

¶14

ancillary reliefs the oresent writ petition stands disposed of.

¶15

	Sd/-
Sd/-	SunilKumarSinha
ChiefJustice	Judge

¶16

padma

In the Matter of M/S Hira Steels Ltd. v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

In the Matter of M/S Hira Steels Ltd. v. Union of India and Others

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

State Vs Aman Singh

State of M.P. Vs Aman Singh

Sheela Shrivastav Vs Mohan Chopra

Smt.Shanti Devi and Another Vs Arjuni Chawal Udyog and Others

Smt Nisha Sahu Vs R.S.Chouhan and Another

Rajesh Kumar Shukla Vs Xjavier Tigga and Another