Mr Altaf Arif Patel v. Fullerton India Credit Company Limited and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The text provided consists of a header, paragraph numbers, and scanned image artifacts for a Misc. Application in the Mumbai Securities Appellate Tribunal. No readable judgment text, parties, or reasoning is present.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
4
EZ
| Date | . •■•.•'Office'Noteai'Appearances *and Roglatrar’s.ordor./ Chairperson’s Orders i....;.v* |
|
|---|---|---|
| O'4HI/'2O'2S tS./o3l'2o^3 |
A rxlor\e Acrzr boVh PaTs-Vi'e^, pdj . £0^ Penndvoj ofdepc^ 4o '2.57 1^-7^023. v. / u Ax' av _■ ’HTlC-P€g _i^berx’y ’ '••T ^<r f\jbne Pott "boV^ PottA-a<£ • fXcAj fb??; Cp^P’'«r'se +d |
-1 3 •r I |
i
/
FAMD
i
^^-SECQYERY^PPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAB
Mlsc Application No. ____ -Of 20
UrH<_
f?**^ / * P No. 1 1 | — J A.| _ of 20^^ J)}ft}
- :
... Appellants
(Advocatoj.JT1
)
Versus
) Z) c> Respondent
(Advocate -------------- )
Dato Office Notes, Appearances
and Registrar's order I Chairperson's Orders
7
Appeal presented .. byf^T ' P ' <3^7-^ ft- Cj-
1 '
Advocate for Ajypellant with G.D, /■■TO of Rs. 2-^D on
being aggrieved by the Impugned order / tm^-erder
Passed on 2^y in S.A. /p^No.^^of <^<5
by DRT^/^^uW u/g 20 of J^STM^rFTAct 1993 ■! 18 of
I
SAR.F.A.E'S.I. Act, 2002.
Exh -1 Appeal Memo
S.O. for compliance to 07 ~~ 2O
i
. REGISTRAR '
r/ene tooA-H.
Adj' ConnpHor>c€
IC'
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · November
- CNR
- 271090011212023
- Bench
- Nishad Fazil F
All orders in this case
3 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court