GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 2440 - COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DELHI

2015 (10) TMI 2440 - COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DELHI - TMI - Construction to asset Passed status quo order Construction over building whereupon status quo granted is nothing but wilful disobedience of orders passed Respondent contends that property impugned leased out in 2005 to a non-party and no order has been passed over this tenancy - It is not indicated anywhere in Observation Report that existing building has been demolished and new structure erected in place of old structure upon which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

third party rights - Order is to read in context it is passed, not beyond context - Since renovation will add value to property, same cannot be considered as detriment to interest of anybody Decided in favour of Respondent. - CONTEMPT APPLICATION NO. 271 OF 2014, COMPANY PETITION NO. 128 (ND) OF 2006 - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - B.S.V. PRAKASH KUMAR, J. For The Petitioner : Karan Malhotra and Ms. Manisha Chaudhary, Advocates For The Respondent : Ms. Pooja M. Saigal and Shashank Raj, Advocates ORDER 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2007 is not on the facts of CA 70/2007 decided on 23.7.2007; but it is on CA 89/2007 moved by the petitioner. Since status quo order has been subsisting till date, it must be read as an order passed to maintain existing position until termination of those orders. Since it is an order of status quo, it shall not be construed as an order limited to alienation or creating third party rights, it is in fact, an order to maintain existing position as on the date of order intact. Therefore, the constru .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the possession of the property making further construction to the building in existence, therefore the Observer stated that the construction has been taking place over the building whereupon status quo order has been passed. Therefore, it is quite evident that the Respondents disobeyed the orders of this Bench dated 1.3.2007. 3. To which, the Counsel for the Respondents submits that CLB passed order of status quo on 23.2.2007 on CA 70/2007 moved by Respondents and on 1.3.2007 moved by the pet .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

70/2007 moved by the Respondents. The Respondents moved that CA (paras 4,5 & 7 of the CA) with an apprehension that the petitioners side was likely to creat third party rights, in this, context, this Bench passed an order dated 23.2.2007 to maintain status quo in relation to the property in dispute. The counsel says it is not an order passed when the tenant making any construction, it is an order passed in the context when the petitioners were negotiating with private parties to create third .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and substance is to restrain the parties from creating third parties. The orders being passed in the context of restraint over alienating the property, the Respondents counsel submits the same cannot be construed as an order to restrain the tenant attending to repair/maintenance work to the building constructed 50 years ago. She says on joint reading of these two orders, there can be no occasion to understand that these orders dated 23.2.2007 and 1.3.2007 are to restrain the tenant attending to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nant violated the orders passed on 1.3.2015. Accordingly, she prays this Bench for dismissal of this Contempt Application She also submits that whatever construction that has been going on is strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Lease Agreement entered with the tenant. She further submits that the Petitioners have not obtained any restraint order to keep the terms and conditions of lease agreement in abeyance. 5. On hearing the submissions, it is pertinent to look into the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

titioners also moved CA 89/2007 for similar order, when DRT was to take steps for auction of the property, in that CA also, this Bench passed another status quo order dated 1.3.2007 directing the Respondents to maintain status quo as ordered on 23.2.20O7. The context for seeking status quo in both the applications when the parties had apprehension third party right could be created over the asset, therefore the status quo order has to be read and understood in the context it was passed, not read .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

endangering to the persons living in it, therefore, the tenant may attend not only to repair, if any renovation is in necessity, he may proceed with, because these orders cannot be said to be passed against the tenant from attending to renovation and repair. Moreover, these two orders were passed in 2007, ignoring the fact that the tenant, who is possessed of the property, is not a party to this proceeding, somehow these orders are in force for the last 8 years, of course, now 1 am not on it. 6. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s party, two-the order was passed to stop creating third party rights, here there is no creation of third party rights. I must also observe that contempt proceedings are not simplicitor civil proceedings, it has punitive consequence, therefore, whenever contempt proceedings are initiated by the court, it has to be extra caution in allowing contempt application. However, this Bench hereby observes that the work happening to the building in dispute is not in wilful disobedience to the orders passe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version