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

2019 Supreme(Bom) 1319

RANJIT MORE, BHARATI H.DANGRE
63 Moons Technologies Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior advocate along with Mr. Abad Ponda, Dr. Sujay Kantawala, Arvind Lakhawat, Mr.Rahul Sarda, Raktim Gogoi, Ms.Manik Joshi, Mantul Bajpai, Ayush Agarwal i/b.Crawford Bayley and Co., Mr.Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w Arvind Lakhawat, Rahul Sarda, Manik Joshi Mantul Bajpai, Ayush Agarwal i/b.Crawford Bayley and Co., Mr.Vaibhav Singh, Radhika Indapurkar i/b M/s. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, Nupur Desai, Aanchal Jaswani, Ginni Ahuja i/b. M/s.Markhand Gandhi, advocates, Mr.Sandeep Karnik, advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr.Rafiq Dada, Sr. Adv. a/w Mr.Avinash Avhad, Spl. PP and Mr.Mahesh Rawool, Ms.G. R. Shastri, AGP, Mr.Ramchandra Lothikar, Sr. P.I, Mr. Pawar API(EOW) Mr.K.Suryakrishnamurthy.

JUDGMENT :

Bharati Dangre, J.

1. A significant and axial issue involved in the two writ petitions before us revolve around the National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL) and the parties are diversificated on the issue as to whether the said establishment is a Financial Establishment or not, and whether it has accepted the deposits.

Both the Writ Petitions are filed by the petitioner which is a listed Company registered under the Companies Act, engaged in the business of developing and selling technology products of facilitating trading on exchanges such as stock exchange and commodity exchange and it claims to have more than 63,000 shareholders and more than 800 employees. The petitioner claims to be a leader in Financial Technologies market and has developed a software by name “ODIN” and it is claimed that this software has provided a platform for online trading and it is claimed by the petitioner that it has become a market leader due to its effort and determination.

2. The petitioner has posed a challenge to the Constitutional validity of Sections 4 and 5 of the Maharashtra Protectio

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