I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Can, in India, a subsidiary of a subsidiary of a holding company be treated as the subsidiary of the holding company even if the holding company is not registered in India and functions, in India, through its subsidiary, which is not registered, in India, as a company under the Companies Act, 1956, but which, in turn, functions through its subsidiary, which is registered, in India, as a company under the Companies Act, 1956? When a subsidiary is a wholly owned subsidiary of the holding company, can the law ever treat the activities, acts or omissions of such a subsidiary as the activities, acts or omissions of its holding company? These are the two questions of paramount importance, which this writ petition has raised.

2. This writ petition is unusual. Unusual, because, in the present case, the writ petitioners, instead of attacking the respondents, are themselves under attack, for, the writ petitioners are accused by the respondents to have suppressed the truth, made incorrect, false and misleading statements, in their writ petition, in order to persuade the High Court to restrain, in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, t