In this contempt application under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the petitioner alleged non-compliance with a direction to serve a scheme. The court noted that the respondent had complied on the day of hearing and disposed of the application.
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.
$~ 31
*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**
Judgment pronounced on: 19 February 2018
NEETU PATRO ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rahul, Advocate.
versus
IYOGI TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT.LTD ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Nakul Jain, Advocate.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER %
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL)
Page 1 of 2
CCP (CO.) 4/2018
Furthermore, counsel for the respondent says that meeting of creditors is fixed on 6.4.2018 and 7.4.2018. Counsel for the petitioner has made a note of the same.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
FEBRUARY 19, 2018 av
Page 2 of 2
CCP (CO.) 4/2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt application should proceed when the respondent complied with the direction to serve a copy of the scheme on the date of hearing.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
NEETU PATRO
IYOGI TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT.LTD
RAJIV SHAKDHER
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
