B. G. R. Energy System Limited v. Vandana Rolling Mills Limited
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION No. 75 of 2017
1. B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018, through Mrs. Prashanti Prasad, W/o Shri H. Prasad, aged about 52 years, Working as Assistant Vice President (Legal) at B.G.R. Energy System Ltd. 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.) - 600018
2. Shashikala Raghupathi, Chairman, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
3. V.R. Mahadevan, Joint Managing Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
4. A. Swaminathan, Joint Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
5. Swarnmugi Kartik, Director Corporate Strategy, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
6. S. R. Tagat, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
7. S. A. Bohra, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
8. M. Gopalkrishna, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
9. M.S. Sunderarajan, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
10. Janana Rajshekharan, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018
11. Hendrich Bohmer, Director, B.G.R. Energy System Limited, 443, Anna Salai, Tenampet, Chennai (T.N.)- 600018 ---- Applicants (Defendants)
Versus
Vandana Rolling Mills Limited, through its Director - Subhash Agrawal, S/o Niranjanlal Agrawal, Vandana Building, M.G. Road, raipur, through Power of Attorney - Santosh Kumar Dubey, S/o Late Laxmishankar Dubey, address - Vandana Building, M.G. Road, Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant (Plaintiff) For Applicants :
Shri J. K. Gupta, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order On Board 04/09/18 Heard.
1.
Mr. J. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants submits that revision petition has become infructuous.
2.
Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka