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

1997 Supreme(SC) 1909

G.T.NANAVATI, G.B.PATTANAIK
Union Carbide Corpn. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


ORDER :

I.A. No. 28-29

1. These applications are ordered to be listed along with Writ Petition (C) No. 66/96.

I.A. Nos. 30-31

2. Learned counsel Mr. Dushyant Dave appearing in these applications for the applicants states that in view of the earlier orders passed by this Court these applications have become infructuous and they are not pressed. Learned counsel for the other side has no objection. These applications are dismissed as infructuous.

I.A. No. 32-35

3. It appears these I As do not now survive. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant in these I As is directed to verify and let the Court know whether they have become infructuous or not. List these applications for further orders on 16.12.1997.

I.A. No. 36-37

4. The learned Additional Solicitor General submits that the Union of India is not in a position to give its response to the affidavit filed by the Sole Trustee with respect to expenditure made by him, for administrative purposes, for the years ending 31st December,, 1995 and 31st December, 1996. Mr. Dushyant Dave, learned counsel for the Sole Trustee states that the necessary details will be filed before this Court, if the teamed Additional Solicitor General indicates in

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