The writ petition was filed seeking certain reliefs. An interlocutory application was also filed seeking identical reliefs. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was considering the interlocutory application. The High Court initially deferred the hearing of the petition awaiting the outcome of the application before the NCLT. The NCLT fixed the matter for a later date. The Respondents opposed the prayer for adjournment, arguing that the High Court should not monitor the proceedings before the NCLT, especially when the entire proceedings are pending before the NCLT and there is an interim order in the Petitioner's favor.
Darshan Lalit Gandhi filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay against the Union of India and others. The petitioner had also filed an interlocutory application no. 33 of 2021 seeking the same reliefs as in the petition. The NCLT was considering the interlocutory application. The High Court initially deferred the hearing of the petition to await the outcome of the NCLT application. The NCLT fixed the matter for 15 June 2023. The respondents opposed the adjournment, arguing that the High Court should not monitor the NCLT proceedings, especially since the entire matter was pending before the NCLT and there was an interim order in the petitioner's favor. The NCLT had recorded that the petitioner's advocate had no idea why the petitioner approached the High
…Sign in to view the parties.
Interlocutory application no. 33 of 2021 was…
The court passed a previous order noting that…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The writ petition was filed seeking certain reliefs. An interlocutory application was also filed seeking identical reliefs. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was considering the interlocutory application. The High Court initially deferred the hearing of the petition awaiting the outcome of the application before the NCLT. The NCLT fixed the matter for a later date. The Respondents opposed the prayer for adjournment, arguing that the High Court should not monitor the proceedings before the NCLT, especially when the entire proceedings are pending before the NCLT and there is an interim order in the Petitioner's favor.
Darshan Lalit Gandhi filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay against the Union of India and others. The petitioner had also filed an interlocutory application no. 33 of 2021 seeking the same reliefs as in the petition. The NCLT was considering the interlocutory application. The High Court initially deferred the hearing of the petition to await the outcome of the NCLT application. The NCLT fixed the matter for 15 June 2023. The respondents opposed the adjournment, arguing that the High Court should not monitor the NCLT proceedings, especially since the entire matter was pending before the NCLT and there was an interim order in the petitioner's favor. The NCLT had recorded that the petitioner's advocate had no idea why the petitioner approached the High
…Interlocutory application no. 33 of 2021 was…
The court passed a previous order noting that…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.