9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. On 20-8-1997 C.A. No. 515 of 1999 for setting aside/recalling the order dated 10-12-1998 was taken up for hearing. The short point canvassed on behalf of the applicants who in fact are the original company that was ordered to be wound up by order dated 10-12-1998 was that on the date when the winding up order was passed, there was a Reference pending before the BIFR and that consequently, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isposed of. In the present case, the respondents' learned counsel Mr. Chandy submitted before me that it is obligatory on the part of the applicants to produce documentary proof before this Court of the fact that their reference was scrutinised and numbered as on 10-12-1998 as otherwise, the bar pleaded will not be operative. I need to mention here that Mr. Chandy advanced another submission, name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... need to point out that it was not obligatory on the part of this Court to have granted any time because it was the basic duty of the applicants to have produced proof of that fact along with the application but since they had not done it, I granted them further time. Today, the learned counsel who represents the company states that his clients did make the effort but were unable to get the requisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate because the company is aware of the fact that the application for setting aside is wholly dependent on this document. 3. In view of the aforesaid position, what emerges is that there is nothing to indicate before me that a reference was pending in the true sense of the term as laid down by the Supreme Court as on 10-12-1998 and if that is the case the solitary ground on which this applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
