TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit in reply till date. When the matter came up for hearing on 20th January, 2003, Counsel for Respondents sought time with a view to file an affidavit in reply to the petition. In the interest of justice, the request was acceded to and the petition was adjourned. However, even today when the petition is taken up for final hearing, the Respondents have not tendered any affidavit in reply to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rities for adjudication of the show cause notices. The Original Petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 have died during the pendency of the petition and accordingly their names have been deleted. 3.In this petition, the Petitioners have challenged to show cause notice dated 14th September, 1989 (Exhibit 'E' to the petition) and show cause notice dated 26/28th September, 1989 (Exhibit 'F' to the petition). 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing the case of the petitioners with that of Mr. Sule and other Directors. In this view of the matter, we see no reason to permit the Respondents to adjudicate the show cause notice qua the Petitioner No.1. Accordingly we hold that the issues raised in the show cause notice dated 14th September, 1989 being covered by the decision of this Court in the case of B.R. Sule (supra) the show cause not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 50,000/- by CEGAT and the same has been paid by the company. In this view of the matter and especially when there is no material with regard to personal involvement of the Petitioner No.1 we see no reason to sustain the second show cause notice dated 26/28th September, 1989 against the Petitioner No. 1. 6.Accordingly, both the show cause notices are quashed and set aside qua the Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
