Dismissed

M/S Vedanta Limited (Erstwhile Sterlite Energy Limited) v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and Anr.

Delhi HC8 Jan 2018W.P.(C)/105/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner withdrew the writ petition and pending applications before the Commission. Respondent secured no coercive steps during the period until the main matter was disposed of. Petitioner assured no unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn along with all pending applications.

What the court decided

M/S Vedanta Limited (Erstwhile Sterlite… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~36

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 105/2018 & CM Nos.475/2018, 476/2018 & 477/2018

¶4

M/S VEDANTA LIMITED (ERSTWHILE STERLITE ENERGY LIMITED) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Akhil Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Mr.M. Mishra & Mr.Nishant Kumar, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Swapna Seshadri, Advocate for R-2.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 08.01.2018

¶10

Ms.Swapna Sheshadri, Advocate appears on advance notice for the respondent No.2 very fairly states that keeping in view the fact that the invoice was issued on 22.08.2017 and the matter is already listed before the respondent No.1 on 11.01.2018, respondent No.2 will not take any coercive steps against the petitioner till the matter is disposed of by the respondent No.1.

¶11

However, she expresses her apprehension that in view of her statement not to take coercive steps, the petitioner will try to prolong the hearing of the petition before the respondent No.1. Mr.Akhil Sibal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, assures the Court that the petitioner will not seek any

¶12

unnecessary adjournment before the respondent No.1. It is made clear that in case, the petitioner seeks any unnecessary adjournments, respondent No.2 will be at liberty to approach this Court by filing an appropriate application.

¶13

Both the parties request that the matter before the respondent No.2/commission be heard expeditiously. It is hoped that keeping in view the above facts, respondent No.1/commission would deal with the matter in an expeditious manner.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for the respondent No.2, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that he does not wish to press the present petition.

¶15

As prayed, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn along with all pending applications.

¶16

A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master.

¶17

REKHA PALLI, J

¶18

JANUARY 08, 2018/ gm

M/S Vedanta Limited (Erstwhile Sterlite Energy Limited) v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

M/S Vedanta Limited (Erstwhile Sterlite Energy Limited) v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohan Kumar Mohanty Vs Directorate of Estate and Ors.

Basal Verma Vs Medical Council of India and Anr.

Naveen Rao Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Hindon River Mills Limited Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited and Ors.

Master Aarav Dewan Vs Modern School and Anr.

Jagdish Prakash and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Smt. Saroj Jain Vs Registrar of Corperative Societies and Ors.

Indian Wind Power Association Vs Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Power and Anr.

Parnika Lal Vs Union of India & Ors.

G.D. Soni Dav Sr. Secondary School, Pusa Road Vs Directorate of Education and Anr.

Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. Vs Alok Mehndiratta & Ors.

Ashok Sagar Vs Medical Council of India & Anr.

Priyanka Vs University of Delhi

Iftikhar Ahmed Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.