R.BALIA, ANIL R.DAVE
CONTEMPORARY TARGETT PRAFUL P. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
JEWEL BRUSHES PVT. LTD. – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS application has been filed by the appellant making a prayer that O. J. Appeal No. 69 of 1998 which is against an order of Company Law Board be placed for hearing before a Single Judge of this Court as under the High Court Rules the matter is one which has to be transacted by a single Judge. The application is opposed by the respondents.
( 2 ) IT is contended by learned counsel for the applicant-appellant that the present appeal is preferred u/s 10f of the Companies Act, 1956. There is no provision under the Gujarat High Court Rules which require an appeal against the order of Company Law Board to be placed before a Division Bench.
( 3 ) OUR attention was invited to Rules 1, 2, 217 and 314 of the Gujarat High Court Rules 1993 laying the foundation of the contention that the appeal is against an order of the Company Law Board on an application moved by the appellant u/s 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 which have been rejected by the impugned order. Thus, this is an appeal against a special act and not arising from Civil Procedure Code. Rule 1 declares generally all jurisdiction of hearing to be with Division Bench except as otherwise provided by any law
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.