M/S. Madhur Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Trinity Auto Components Ltd.

1/2 3.CP-29-2011.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.29 OF 2011 Mahindra Ugine Steel Company ....Petitioner Vs.

Trinity Auto Components Limited ....Respondent WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.107 OF 2011 WITH COMPANY PETITION NO.108 OF 2011 ---- Ms. Anamika i/b. HAS Advocates for petitioner in CP/29/2011. None for petitioner in CP/107/2011 and CP/108/2011. None for respondent.

---- CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2018 P.C.:

COMPANY PETITION NO.29 OF 2011 Ms. Anamika, counsel for petitioner requests the petition be kept in the next week to enable her to take instructions because she has recently been instructed in the matter and undertakes to file Vakalatnama. On record is a copy of letter dated 19th August 2015 from respondent company informing petitioner about sanctioning the Scheme by BIFR on 30th July 2015 and asking petitioner whether it is agreeable to accept the settlement as proposed in the BIFR order. Ms. Anamika is unable to state whether petitioner has accepted this proposal. Therefore, this petition be listed for directions on 29th June 2018.

Gauri Gaekwad

2/2 3.CP-29-2011.doc So far as other petitions, viz., company petition no.107 of 2011 and company petition no.108 of 2011, both petitions dismissed for want of prosecution.

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gauri Gaekwad