Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (12) TMI 1292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion. Once it is found that, challenge to the sale deed dated 04.03.2013 is a material fact for this petition, non-disclosure thereof would not have any less effect then suppression thereof. The consequence thereof would be, dismissal of this petition. Additionally this Court finds that, had it been pointed out in the petition itself, then what is noted in 6.1 above would not have been a factor against the petitioner, but then, on the contents of the said civil suit, the petitioner could not have been granted any relief by this Court on merits, since during the pendency of the challenge to the said sale deed, the consequential order passed by the respondent Corporation cannot be interfered with. Viewing from one more angle this Court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner has taken this Court through the various documents to contend as to how the very foundation of the transaction between the parties, which led to passing of the impugned order by the Corporation, is illegal and contradictory. Learned advocate for the petitioner has also relied on the decision of Hon ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of S.J.S. Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar Ors. reported in (2004) 7 SCC 166 to meet with the preliminary objection of the respondent (which is noted hereinafter) with regard to the suppression of material fact by the petitioner. It is submitted that, the impugned order be interfered with. 4. On the other hand, Mr.Sanjanwala, learned se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .2 has already discharged his obligation flowing from the said arrangement and thereafter when the question of transferring the said plot in his name came, the present petitioner started creating hurdles. It is submitted that, the petitioner even disowns the documents which he himself had signed to facilitate the said arrangement. It is submitted that this petition be dismissed. 5. Mr.Dave, learned advocate for the respondent Corporation has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit in reply dated 21.07.2014 filed on behalf of the Corporation, wherein the chronology of events of the transfer in question is explained in detail. It is submitted that, it is the inter-se dispute of the Directors of the Company which is sought to be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ale deed is a material fact for the present petition. Once it is found that, challenge to the sale deed dated 04.03.2013 is a material fact for this petition, non-disclosure thereof would not have any less effect then suppression thereof. The consequence thereof would be, dismissal of this petition. 6.2 Additionally this Court finds that, had it been pointed out in the petition itself, then what is noted in 6.1 above would not have been a factor against the petitioner, but then, on the contents of the said civil suit, the petitioner could not have been granted any relief by this Court on merits, since during the pendency of the challenge to the said sale deed, the consequential order passed by the respondent Corporation cannot be interfe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... getting any relief from this Court. 6.5 It is noted that, the petitioner has not been successful in getting any interim relief from the Court below on the application Exh.5 filed in the said civil suit. The timing of filing of this petition in substance indicates that, this is filing of Exh.5 application again, with the change of nomenclature, which this Court is not inclined to entertain. 6.6 In above factual background, the reliance on behalf of the petitioner on the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of S.J.S. Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. (supra) would not take the case of the petitioner any further. 6.7 On conjoint consideration of what is found and noted above, this Court arrives at an inescapable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates