RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Rakesh Bhhatia – Appellant
Versus
Pramod Sharma – Respondent
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.
1. The application for review entails inter-aila the question of very maintainability of review after unconditional withdrawal of an appeal preferred against the order sought to be reviewed.
2. Review is sought of certain portions of the Order dated 21st April, 2009 disposing of the application of the plaintiffs/applicants under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC. The plaintiffs/applicants instituted the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from selling certain shares of the plaintiff No. 6 company. It is the case of the plaintiffs/applicants that the said shares were pledged/placed as security with the defendants for the loan advanced by the defendants to the plaintiffs. The defendants claim to be the purchaser of the shares. Interim relief of restraining the defendants from dealing with the shares was claimed. Vide order dated 21st April, 2009 the said application of the plaintiffs for interim relief was allowed, subject to the condition of the plaintiffs within 45 days depositing in this court the loan amount with interest at the rate pleaded by the plaintiffs, till the date of deposit, and further subject to the plaintiffs filing
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) v. B.N. Bhattacharjee AIR 1979 SC 1725
Dalip Singh v. MCD 140 (2007) DLT 20
Hari Singh v. S. Seth AIR 1996 Delhi 21 (DB) : 1995(32) DRJ 425(DB)
Kabari Pvt. Ltd. v. Shivnath Shroff AIR 1996 SC 742
Manik Lal Majumdar v. Gouranga Chandra Dey (2005) 2 SCC 400
Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1964 SC 1372
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Ravi Kumar Anand AIR 1995 SC 2076
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.