9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 295 - SCH - SEBIRequest to place on record a compilation of documents - Writ petitions by minority shareholders - HELD THAT - This Court is apprised of the fact that the proceedings are listed tomorrow (29 November 2023) before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Hence, it is not necessary for this Court to entertain the Special Leave Petition at this stage, particularly bearing in mind what has been observed in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the earlier order 2023 (12) TMI 241 - SC ORDER which read as follows 2 Since the impugned orders of the High Court are purely of an interlocutory nature, we are not inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution. However, the parties would be at liberty to pursue their remedies in accordance with law on all counts after the final judgment of the High Court. Should it become necessary for SEBI to raise the issue of interpretation of Regulation 29 at a future date, that issue is kept open to be agitated. SLP dismissed.
Issues involved: Dismissal of Special Leave Petition, Revocation of settlement order by SEBI, Survival of prayer clauses, Entertaining the Special Leave Petition, Interpretation of Regulation 29
Upon hearing the counsel, the Supreme Court noted that an earlier Special Leave Petition had been dismissed by the Court. The Solicitor General highlighted that the settlement order giving rise to the proceedings had been revoked by SEBI, rendering the petition before the High Court infructuous. However, the respondent's senior counsel argued that certain prayer clauses of the petition still required determination. The Court acknowledged that the matter was listed before the High Court and, considering the nature of the orders and observations made previously, declined to entertain the Special Leave Petition at that stage. The Court emphasized that parties were free to pursue remedies after the final judgment of the High Court. The issue of interpretation of Regulation 29 was kept open for future consideration if necessary. Consequently, the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of.
|
