Under section 307/2017, concurrent single judge held no appeal lay, dismissing as not maintainable. Expected Ca 307/2017 on March 17, 2017 for status quo suit.
Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; no costs awarded.
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.
$~5
OMWAY BUILDESTATE PVT.LTD & ANR.
..... Appellants Represented by: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr. Advocate instructed by Mr.Naveen Gautam & Ms.Manisha Mehta, Advocates.
versus
RAVI SHARAMA & ANR.
..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Mittal, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
O R D E R % 01.03.2017 CM No.8337/2017
Allowed subject to just exceptions.
CO.APP. 5/2017
“Mr.J.P.Senth, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent company, on instructions, prays for an accommodation in order to ensure the presence of the managing director of the respondent company before this Court on the next date of hearing.
CO.APP. 5/2017
Page 1 of 2
Mr.Janak Goyal, director shall remain present in court so as to enable this Court to question him with regard to the state of affairs of the company, if considered necessary. Renotify on 17th March, 2017.”
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J
YOGESH KHANNA, J
MARCH 01, 2017 M
CO.APP. 5/2017
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal is maintainable against an interim order.
Omway Buildestate Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Ravi Sharama & Anr.
Pradeep Nandrajog
Yogesh Khanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
