Dismissed

M3M India Pvt. Ltd. through Its Ar Mr. Amresh Kumar Anand v. Union of India through Its Secretary & Ors.

Delhi HC24 Jan 2024W.P.(C)/3920/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner appeared without counsel. The Acting Chief Justice dismissed two concurrent civil miscellaneous applications filed for restoring a disposed petition and for bringing additional facts on record, finding them not maintainable as the underlying petition was declared infructuous.

What the court decided

AI extract

M3M India Pvt. Ltd. through Its Ar Mr. Amresh Kumar Anand Vs Union of India through Its Secretary & Ors. — Delhi HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~27

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3920/2023

¶4

M3M INDIA PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS AR MR. AMRESH KUMAR ANAND .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: None. Versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Ms. Nisha Sharma & Ms. Tanya Chowdhary, Advs. for R-3.

¶7

Mr. Vikas Mehta, Mr. Kartik Pandey & Ms. Nitika Grover, Advs. for R-4. Mr. Mehul Parti & Ms. Shivangi Bajpai, Advs. for R-5. Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, Ms. Charu Modi, Ms. Kirti Dang & Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advs. for R-6.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA O R D E R

¶9

% 06.12.2024 CM No.12344/2024 (For restoration of the order dated 24.01.2024) & CM No.12345/2024 (for bringing on record additional facts)

¶10

None appears for the applicant / petitioner.

¶11

The present application has been filed, inter alia, praying that the above captioned petition which was disposed of by an order dated 24.01.2024 be restored. The application proceeds on the basis that the above-captioned petition was disposed of on account of non-appearance of the counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

We have perused the order dated 24.01.2024. The same indicates that the above-captioned petition was disposed of as infructuous as the National Company Law Tribunal had approved the Resolution Plan on 17.05.2023.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/12/2024 at 11:03:27

¶14

Accordingly, CM No.12344/2024 is not maintainable and the same is dismissed. Consequently, CM No.12345/2024 is also dismissed.

¶15

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶16

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J

¶17

DECEMBER 06, 2024 ‘gsr’

¶18

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/12/2024 at 11:03:27

M3M India Pvt. Ltd. through Its Ar Mr. Amresh Kumar Anand v. Union of India through Its Secretary & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M3M India Pvt. Ltd. through Its Ar Mr. Amresh Kumar Anand v. Union of India through Its Secretary & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aakash Yadav Vs Union of India & Anr.

Sushma Bhatia Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi, through the Commissioner

Ankita Meena Vs Airport Authority of India and Anr.

Shiva Industries Vs Union of India Ministry of Defence & Ors.

Shri Shyam Shikshan Sansthan & Anr. Vs Government of India & Anr.

Prof. S Karan Shiksha Samiti & Anr. Vs Government of India & Anr.

Shri Jangam Jyoti Murugha Rajendra D.Ed. College Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Prakash Chand Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 Vs Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd.

Sandeep Khanna Vs Pr Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -3 Vs Late Dr. A.H. Rizvi

Mol Corporation Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

Readers Digest Book and Home Entertainment (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 19(1), New Delhi & Ors.

Nortel Networks India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax