Back
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ASHWIN D. BHOBE
Manisha Nimesh Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Technology Development Board – Respondent
ORDER :
(PER RAVINDRA V GHUGE, J)
1. On 12th November, 2024, the Bench (Coram : A.S. Chandurkar & Rajesh Patil, JJ.), referred to the order dated 18th July, 2024 passed in Interim Application (L) No.22605 of 2024 with Interim Application (L) No.22609 of 2024, and directed that this Petition should not be listed before the said Bench.
2. On 13th November, 2024, the Bench (Coram: M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Shantilal Jain, JJ), recorded that the matter would not be listed before the Bench of which Justice Jain is a member.
3. Pursuant to the above, the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court has placed this matter before this Bench.
4. On 27th November, 2024, we considered the oral submissions of the learned Advocate Mr. Nedumpara for almost three hours, from 12:00 noon to 1:30 p.m. and from 2:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. As Respondent Nos. 1 to 6, 7, and 18 had appeared suo moto, they were unable to file their affidavit and reply. We permitted them to file their written notes/bullet points or affidavit in reply, considering extensive submissions of Mr. Nedumpara. On the request of Mr. Nedumpara, that a hearing after two days was inconvenient to him, we posted the matter on 4th December, 2
Judicial immunity under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 is upheld, but the court emphasizes the need for accountability and the exhaustion of alternative remedies before seeking writ relief.
The initiation of arbitration is impermissible due to an existing moratorium that restrains all legal proceedings, including arbitration, until the related insolvency matters are resolved.
Condition precedent for invocation of Section 241(2) of the Act, which requires the Central Government to come to an opinion that the affairs of the company “are being conducted in a manner prejudici....
This judgment clarifies that disputes involving the implementation of resolution plans under the IBC should be resolved by the specialized forums established under the Act.
Judicial orders, particularly those granting injunctions, must be reasoned and demonstrate the application of legal standards to the facts; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice.
No question of the NCLT sitting over the judgment and orders passed by previous bodies like BIFR, AAIFR or even learned Single Judge as was sought to be made out. On the contrary, we feel that the de....
Restoration applications under Rule 48 of NCLT Rules are not maintainable when a petition is dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance with tribunal orders, emphasizing the court's lack of jur....
The absence of due service of notice and sufficient cause for non-appearance can justify setting aside an ex-parte order under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
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
