SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 687

R. C. LAHOTI, G. P. MATHUR, C. K. THAKKER
STATE Bank Of India – Appellant
Versus
M. S. BASI – Respondent


ORDER

1. The only person interested in contesting this special leave petition insofar as the impugned order dated 30-1-2004 passed by the High Court is concerned, is Respondent I, who is present on caveat.

2.Leave granted.

3. With the consent of the parties, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Respondent 1 are heard finally.

4. It is not disputed and as is clear from the subsequent order dated 3-2-2004 passed by the High Court that the impugned order dated 30-1-2004 was passed without affording the party adversely affected i.e. the appellant before us, an opportunity of hearing. For this short reason, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.

5. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 30-1-2004 is set aside. Liberty is allowed to Respondent 1 to move a fresh application seeking such relief as may be advised which shall be heard and decided by the High Court only after giving the opposite parties an opportunity of hearing.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top