Back
S.J.KATHAWALLA
Anand Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar – Respondent
The judgment observes the following regarding rights of third parties to file separate suits or appeals:
No legitimate third party rights were prejudiced by the ex-parte restraints, as no third party objections were raised despite opportunities; defendants did not claim any such rights on behalf of third parties. [4000579630016]
Proposed third party buyers (e.g., Wellness Group, Mr. Abrol, D-force Electro Werke Pvt. Ltd.) for attached medical shop were permitted to participate in proceedings via offers and payments, but no independent rights to file separate suits or appeals were recognized or exercised by them. [4000579630035][4000579630036][4000579630037][4000579630038][4000579630039][4000579630040][4000579630042][4000579630043]
Third party consents (e.g., from Mr. Vipul Shah) were obtained for share transfers, but such third parties were not granted any rights to file separate suits or appeals in the proceedings. (!) (!) (!) [4000579630034]
No observations indicate that any third party exercised or was recognized as having rights to file a separate suit or appeal against the orders. [4000579630016]
S.J. Kathawalla, J.
1. At this point of time, the Judiciary is mired in challenges of a very grave nature, perhaps like never before. It is being observed that there is, amongst some litigants and their Advocates, virtually no fear or hesitation in making false statements and misrepresentations before the Court, which should under any and all circumstances be dealt with the iron hand of the judiciary with zero tolerance for such blatantly unethical and mala-fide behaviour.
2. The dignity and respect of the Court along with its prescribed procedures is being unabashedly violated by certain litigants who are using foul and unfair means to demean and denounce the august Judiciary by making frivolous and baseless allegations against the Judges, and/or their opponents and their Advocates, with a view to rescind and back-track on solemn undertakings and statements earlier made in Court. This malicious modus operandi of certain dishonest litigants is absolutely unacceptable, as it seeks to subvert the very foundations of justice that the Judiciary is committed to uphold. With no merit in their case, and in a bid to avert an unfavourable order being passed against them, such dishon
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
