https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460168 A procedural time limit in clause 8.3.5.3 of the SEBI (DIP) Guidelines, 2000 was treated as directory because it fixed a period for taking steps toward listing but did not specify any consequence for breach. The Calcutta HC held that delay in filing the listing application could justify updating the record and requiring current facts, but it could not by itself extinguish the right to seek listing or bar consideration of the application. The application was to be renewed through a fresh filing and processed within fixed timelines, with delay not precluding listing relief. en-us Mon, 07 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:37:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460168 A procedural time limit in clause 8.3.5.3 of the SEBI (DIP) Guidelines, 2000 was treated as directory because it fixed a period for taking steps toward listing but did not specify any consequence for breach. The Calcutta HC held that delay in filing the listing application could justify updating the record and requiring current facts, but it could not by itself extinguish the right to seek listing or bar consideration of the application. The application was to be renewed through a fresh filing and processed within fixed timelines, with delay not precluding listing relief. Case-Laws SEBI Mon, 07 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460168