High Court Madras High Court

M/S.21St Century Management vs M/S.Gujarat Industrial … on 16 September, 2009

Madras High Court
M/S.21St Century Management vs M/S.Gujarat Industrial … on 16 September, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16-9-2009

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

REVIEW APPLICATION No.120 of 2009
and
MP No.1 of 2009


M/s.21st Century Management 
	Services Ltd.,
Having its registered office
at No.158, First Floor,
Eldams Road, Teynampet,
Chennai 600 018
represented by its 
Authorised Signatory
K.Krishnaswamy						.. Petitioner

vs

M/s.Gujarat Industrial Investment 
	Corporation Ltd.,
Represented by its Corporate 
	Law Officer/Power of Attorney 
K.A.Trivedi
Having its Registered Office at
5th Floor, Block Nos.11 and 12
Udyog Bhavan, Gandhi Nagar
Gujarat 382 001.					.. Respondent
	Review application filed under Sec.114 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 47 Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. against the order of this Court dated 28.8.2009 made in O.S.A.No.157 of 2009.
		For Petitioner		:  Mr.Arvind P.Datar
						   Senior Counsel
						   for Mr.K.Ramasamy

		For Respondent		:  Mr.T.K.Seshadri
						   Senior Counsel
						   for M/s.R & P Partners

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
This review application has been brought forth by the appellant to review the order of this Court made in OSA No.157 of 2009.

2.This Court while dismissing the appeal has affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge in entirety. At the time when the order was passed by the learned Single Judge, a Provisional Liquidator was appointed by the Court. The appeal was heard, and at the time of dismissal of the appeal, the entire order of the learned Single Judge has been affirmed.

3.Now it is brought to the notice of the Court by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner/appellant that the question as to whether the circumstances prevailed for the appointment of the Provisional Liquidator was neither considered by nor addressed before the learned Single Judge, but the appointment was made so, and hence by dismissing the appeal if the entire order order of the learned Single Judge is affirmed, that part of the order pertaining to the appointment of Provisional Liquidator would also become affirmed, and under the circumstances, that part of the order of the learned Single Judge has got to be set aside.

4.The learned Senior Counsel for the respondent while denying all other allegations found in the grounds of the review application, on merits of the matter would sate that as far as the question as to the appointment of the Provisional Liquidator is concerned, it can be left open to be addressed before the learned Single Judge.

5.Under the circumstances, while the order of the learned Single Judge in all other respects except the appointment of the Provisional Liquidator, is affirmed, it is kept open for the parties to put forth their respective submissions before the learned Single Judge in that regard, and the learned Single Judge is also required to consider whether the circumstances are prevailing for appointment of the Provisional Liquidator or not and pass suitable orders thereon. Accordingly, this review application is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is closed.

nsv