Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.