9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. ORDER 1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the first respondent dated 24-6-1996 rejecting their appeal against the rejection of stock exchanges of their application, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out the following sentences in the impugned order, which, according to him, vitiates the entire proceedings : "An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ange, Mumbai, the company is required to submit necessary documents and approach the exchange for finalisation of the basis of allotment of shares on or before 60th day from the date of closure of issue. Thereafter, the company is required to submit the documents for listing within a period of 70 days from the closure. Since the petitioner company had not complied with this requirement in spite of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent noted that the rejection of the listing of application was on two grounds. One was that the Stock Exchange was not consulted before finalising the basis as to the allotment and the documents were not furnished before the 70 days period, beyond which, stock exchange cannot give the listing permission. 7. In fact, only Madras Stock Exchange, which is the second respondent herein, had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was also no effort on the part of the petitioner to ensure that the issue gets listed by the 70th day from the closure of issue. The authority was not willing to accept that sickness of one person would hamper the activities of the company to the extent that the company is unable to file documents to have their application listed within time. In such circumstances, the authority dismissed the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
