https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273274 The appeal was disposed of with the appellant permitted to file a reply by 03.09.2007, a rejoinder by 10.09.2007, and an interlocutory application to be heard expeditiously, preferably by 30.09.2007. The Court expected the Company Law Board to decide the interlocutory application within the specified time limit. The appellant was allowed to raise any preliminary issue regarding their necessity as a party, to be decided along with the interlocutory application filed by the original petitioner. The appeal was accordingly disposed of, leading to the disposal of the Civil Application for stay. en-us Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:04:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273274 The appeal was disposed of with the appellant permitted to file a reply by 03.09.2007, a rejoinder by 10.09.2007, and an interlocutory application to be heard expeditiously, preferably by 30.09.2007. The Court expected the Company Law Board to decide the interlocutory application within the specified time limit. The appellant was allowed to raise any preliminary issue regarding their necessity as a party, to be decided along with the interlocutory application filed by the original petitioner. The appeal was accordingly disposed of, leading to the disposal of the Civil Application for stay. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273274