TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal, Allows Grievance Applications Before Tribunal; Sets Protocols for Interventions.</h1> <h3>Paramwir Singh Tiwana & Ors., Aklia Constructions & Anr., Greater Mohali Area Development Versus Puma Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. And Vivek Joshi & Ors., Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Versus Pawan Kumar Garg & Ors.</h3> Paramwir Singh Tiwana & Ors., Aklia Constructions & Anr., Greater Mohali Area Development Versus Puma Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. And Vivek Joshi & Ors., ... Issues:1. Challenge to an interim order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.2. Filing of Interlocutory Applications by various parties.3. Directions regarding filing of documents during COVID-19 protocols.4. Impleadment applications in different company appeals.5. Permission to file Proposed Intervention Applications in multiple appeals.6. Representation of Home Buyers and filing of an Interlocutory Application.The judgment pertains to a challenge against an interim order issued by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed a Civil Appeal, allowing the appellants to file an application for the pointed-out grievance before the Tribunal. Following this, an Interlocutory Application was filed by the Appellant's counsel as per the Supreme Court's directions. Due to COVID-19 protocols, all hard copy documents must be sanitized for 48 hours before being placed on record. Additionally, an Interlocutory Application was filed by 'Axis Finance Limited' in a specific company appeal. The Respondent's counsel referred to certain pages in the Appeal Paper Book regarding an Intervenor but did not make them a party to the case. The Intervenor was directed to file a Hard Copy of the Reply Affidavit within a specified timeline. Another Interlocutory Application was filed in a different company appeal, and the Proposed Intervenor was directed to present arguments on the next date. Impleadment Applications were filed in two company appeals as hard copies, which were to be checked and placed on record by the registry. The Appellant sought permission to file Proposed Intervention Applications in multiple appeals, with a directive to file hard copies within a specified timeframe. Lastly, a set of Home Buyers, represented by counsel, filed an Interlocutory Application, with a request for the Intervenor to serve an advance copy to the Appellant's counsel via email. The matter was listed for admission on a specific date.In conclusion, the judgment addresses various legal proceedings related to challenges against interim orders, filing of applications by different parties, compliance with COVID-19 protocols for document submission, impleadment applications, proposed intervention applications, and representation of Home Buyers in the context of company appeals before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. The detailed analysis covers the specific actions taken by the parties involved, the directives issued by the Tribunal, and the procedural steps to be followed in each instance, ensuring a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings outlined in the judgment.
TaxTMI 