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

2011 Supreme(SC) 1074

G.S.SINGHVI, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
TIMES GLOBAL BROADCASTING COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
PARSHURAM BABARAM SAWANT – Respondent


ORDER

1. This petition is directed against order dated 28.09.2011 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, the operative portion of which reads thus:

We have considered the arguments advanced by the parties and the enunciations relied upon. We allow the application in terms of prayer Clauses (a) and (b), subject to the condition that an amount of Rupees twenty crores is deposited by the applicants-Defendants with the Registry of this Court within 6 (six) weeks from today and a bank guarantee of a nationalized bank for the remaining amount of Rupees eighty crores is furnished to the Registry of this Court within a period of 10(ten) weeks from today. The deposited amount shall be invested in a fixed deposit initially for a period of one year with a nationalized bank.

2. Shri Harish N. Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners argued that seriously debatable questions are required to be adjudicated by the High Court in the appeal filed by the Petitioners against the judgment of the trial Court and, therefore, there was no justification for issue of a direction to deposit rupees twenty crores and for furnishing bank guarantee of rupees eighty crores.

3. We h



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