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

2020 Supreme(SC) 319

ARUN MISHRA, M.R.SHAH, B.R.GAVAI
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
V. V. F Limited – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :B. Krishna Prasad, Ashish Gopal Garg, Rakesh Garg, Ms. Shweta Garg, Himanshu Shekhar, Advocates
For the Respondent:E. C. Agrawala, Ramendra Lal Auddy, Rajan Narain, V. K. Sidharthan, S. S. Shroff, M/S. K J John and Co, Mrs. Bina Gupta, Ms. Diksha Rai, K. V. Mohan, Satya Mitra, Partha Sil, Pawanshree Agrawal, Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, Shriram P. Pingle, Shekhar Prit Jha, B. Krishna Prasad, Praveen Kumar, M/S. Khaitan & Co., Rahul Narayan, Shashwat Goel, Nikhil Singhvi, Ms. Sonia Dube, Shatadru Chakraborty, Ms. Kanchan Yadav, Anurag Singh, M/S. Legal Options, Sunil Murarka, Kunal Chatterji, Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Pravar Veer Misra, R. Parthasarathy, Vishal Gupta, Rana Ranjit Singh, Gopal Singh, Raghvendra Kumar, Narendra Kumar, Ms. Diksha Rai Goswami, Parthiv K. Goswami, Advocates

JUDGMENT

M.R. Shah, J.

Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.

Civil Appeals @ SLP (C) Nos. 28194-28201 of 2010

2. As common question of law and facts arise in this group of appeals and as such arise out of the impugned common judgment and order dated 10.03.2010 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in respective Special Civil Application Nos. 5909/2008, 6300/2008, 6298/2008, 6299/2008, 5907/2008, 8468/2008, 6334/2008 and 6562/2008, all these appeals are being decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 10.03.2010 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in respective Special Civil Application Nos. 5909/2008, 6300/2008, 6298/2008, 6299/2008, 5907/2008, 8468/2008, 6334/2008 and 6562/2008, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the aforesaid writ petitions preferred by the respondents herein - original writ petitioners and by which the High Court has held that the impugned policy of withdrawal of the benefit/incentive to the original writ pe


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