9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to the order dated 2nd February, 2012 of the learned Company Judge - appeal is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. - CO.APP. 97/2012 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2012 - MR. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW J. Appellant: Mr. Anurag Pratap Dr. Manmohan Sharma, Advs. Respondent: Mr. Alok Aggarwal, Mr. Uday Kumar Mr. Mayank, Advs. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1. This appeal is preferred against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ability thereof. The matter was adjourned to today on the request of the counsel for the appellant to study the matter. 3. The appeal is filed under Section 483 of the Act. However Section 483 provides for appeals from orders made or decision given in the matter of winding up of a Company by the Court. The said provision thus cannot be invoked. 4. The counsel for the appellant has today drawn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be not laying down a correct proposition of law and it was held that no further appeal (from an order in an appeal under Section 10F of the Act) had been provided under the Act and Parliament while amending Section 100A of the CPC w.e.f. 1st July, 2002 took away the letters patent power of High Court in the matter of appeal against order of a Single Judge to a Division Bench. 6. The counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany Judge. Of course the counsel for the appellant controverts and has relied on Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. Vs. The Workmen AIR 1981 SC 960 and Sahi Ram Vs. Avtar Singh AIR 1999 Delhi 96 (DB) to contend that dismissal in limine without speaking order or withdrawal of an SLP does not come in the way of an appeal being filed. However since we find the appeal in any case t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
