← Library
Bombay High CourtAPP/565/2014

Sahjun Impex Trading Pvt. Ltd. v. The Official Liquidator H.C. Bombay Of M/S.Patheja Forgings And Auto Parts Manf.Ltd(In Liqn)And23 O

2015-02-06Hon'Ble Justice Revati Mohite Dere,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Kanade2 pages

APP. 565-14 VPH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL No. 565 OF 2014 IN NOTICE OF MOTION No. 1324 OF 2011 IN SUIT No. 13 OF 2010 Sahjun Impex Trading Pvt. Ltd.

...

Appellant Vs.

The Official Liquidator of Patheja Forgings & Auto Parts Manufacturers Ltd. (In Liqn.) & Ors.

...

Respondents *** Mr. Zubin Behramkamdin a/w Niranjan Amit & Prerak Sharma i/b B. Amin & Co., for the Appellant.

Mr. Snehal Shah a/w M/s. Geetanjali Joshi i/b Doijodi Associates, for Respondent No. 7.

Mr. Monil Punjabi i/b Apex Law Partners, for Respondent No. 11. *** CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

DATE : FEBRUARY 6, 2015 PC.

1.

The Appellant is challenging the order dated 23rd December, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Notice of Motion No. 1324 of 2011 on the ground that motion is not served on the Respondents. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that all the Respondents, in fact, were served, 1 / 2

APP. 565-14 and therefore, the observation made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order is not correct.

2.

It is submitted that so far as Defendant No. 7 is concerned, the Appellant / Plaintiff has withdrawn the suit against Defendant No. 7, which fact has been recorded by this Court in order dated 25th August, 2014. Therefore, Respondent No. 7 / Defendant No. 7 may be deleted from the array of parties. The Appellant has already filed affidavit of service stating therein that all the Defendants were, in fact, served. It appears that the observation made by the learned Single Judge, in paragraph 2 of the impugned order, is incorrect. Impugned order is, therefore, set aside. Notice of Motion No. 1324 of 2011, against Defendants / Respondents except Defendant No. 7, is restored to the file. Appeal is accordingly allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

[REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.] Vinayak Halemath 2 / 2