Madras High CourtCMA/860/2003dismissed for nonprosecution

M.M.Subrahmanyam v. Gulf Olefins (P)Ltd

2019-11-25Honourable Mr Justice C. Saravanan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.11.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN C.M.A.Nos.860 & 861 of 2003 and C.M.P.No.6164 of 2003 C.M.A.No.860 of 2003 1.M.M.Subrahmanyam 2.M.S.Prakash 3.T.Indira 4.M.S.Meenakshi 5.R.Rajalakshmi ... Appellants vs 1.Gulf Olefins (P) Ltd 2.M.S.Rajaram 3.M.Girija Rajaram 4.M.Krishna Mohan 5.M.Padmapriya 6.M.Venkataraman 7.S.K.Jena 8.R.Kalyanaraman 9.J.Lawrence Inbaraj 10.R.Srinivasan 11.R.Pattabhiraman ... Respondents C.M.A.No.861 of 2003 1.M.M.Subrahmanyam 2.M.S.Prakash 3.Shobhana Prakash ... Appellants vs Page No 1 of 3

1.Prasanna Investments (P) Ltd 2.M.S.Rajaram 3.M.Girija Rajaram 4.M.Padmapriya 5.M.Krishna Mohan ... Respondents Prayer in C.M.A.No.860 of 2003: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 10-F of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, against the order dated 07.11.2002, made in C.P.No.67 of 1999, on the file of the Additional Principal Bench of the Company Law Board at Chennai.

Prayer in C.M.A.No.861 of 2003: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 10-F of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, against the order dated 07.11.2002, made in C.P.No.68 of 1999, on the file of the Additional Principal Bench of the Company Law Board at Chennai.

For Appellant : No Appearance For R1 to R5 and R9 to R11 : No Appearance For R6 to R8 : Not ready in notice C O M M O N J U D G M E N T When these matters were taken up for hearing on 01.10.2019, Registry was directed to delete the name of the learned counsel for the appellant Mr.Srinath Sridevan in the cause list. Hence, the matter was directed to be posted on 22.11.2019. Again, when these matters were listed on 22.11.2019, Registry was directed to comply with the earlier order, since the learned counsel for the appellant name was not deleted on the previous occasion.

2. Even today (25.11.2019), when these matters are called, there is no representation for the Appellant though their name is printed in the list. It appears that the appellant is not interested in pursuing with the present appeal. Page No 2 of 3

3. In view of the same, these appeals are dismissed as non-prosecution and is accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VII) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar drl To 1.The Additional Principal Bench of the Company Law Board at Chennai 2.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.

C.M.A.Nos.860 & 861 of 2003 and C.M.P.No.6164 of 2003 aa07/01/2020 Page No 3 of 3