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



JUDGMENT

[ ENCLOSURE (3) ]

I. APPLICATION

This is the plaintiffs application in enclosure (3) under O.29 of the Rules of the High Court 1980 for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant, the defendant's directors, agents and servants from presenting a winding-up petition in connection with a statutory notice dated 16 July 2002 issued under s.218 of the Companies Act

2

1965 ("the statutory demand") which the defendant has served on the plaintiff, and also to restrain the defendant from taking any steps to advertise or gazette the winding-up petition and further proceedings in connection with the statutory demand.

For brevity, a reference to a section and an order is a reference to that section and order in the Companies Act 1965 and the Rules of the High Court 1980 respectively.

II. PLAINTIFF'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION

The plaintiff through learned counsel Miss Sheena M. Sinnappah raised a preliminary objection pertaining to the lack of authority on the part of one Abdul Hadi bin Arshad, the deponent of affidavits in enclosures (8), (10) and (13) for the

3

defendant, on the ground that the deponent was not an employee of the defendant; and that in the letter in enclosure (

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