- 1- IN THE I-HG]-I COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 313* DAY OF AUGUST. 2010 BEFORE THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH B Ai73~I.'f CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No. 232/'fi:__()o5r.,: '- BETWEEN: M/ S. Verve Investment & Finance T. Private Limited, " _V A Private Limited Company incorporated Under the Companies Act 1956 Having their registered offie'e~.at No.10; T,'La1it?'._ Wode House Road I 5 v Mumbai ---- 400 039 ._ By its Director _ A ' Srnt. Padma. _ V ' ....PI33'I'ITIONER [By Partners, Advs.) 1.
M / s_Hytaisnn1 vMagr1*etics Ltd.,
A.]?ub1ic Limited Con-ipariy
incorporizated uricie1*’the Companies
, ‘Act, 195(54,Ii..aving its registered
A _ Officewat M’a:_r1iti House
” ._ ‘Opp:V’;Aii~v.India;’Ashram Road
‘.Ahmeda'{Jad.3- 380 009.
Reprefsented by its Managing Director
Mr. Bharat Bhai A.Patel
” Bharat Bhai A. Patel
A’ Father’s name not known
To the Petitioner
Age: Major
Occupation: Managing Director
M / s Hytaisun Magnetics Ltd.,
Residing at 14/A. Hindu Colony
Stadium Road, Ahrnedabad.
-2_
Mrs. Mrudulaben B. Patel
W/o Bharat Bhai A.Pate1
Age: Major Occupation: Director
M/ s I-Iytaisurn Magnetics Ltd.,
Residing at 14/A, Hindu Colony
Stadium Road
Ahmedabad
Mr. Snehal B.Pate1
S / 0. Mr. Bharat Bhai A Patel
Occupation: Director
M / s I-Iytaisun Magnetics Ltd.,
Residing at 14/A, I-Iindu Coiony
Stadium Road
Ahmedabaci.
Mr. Dhararn Vir Kapllifl g
Father’s Name not kri-own L
To the Petitioner ;
Age: major Occupation:..Director.,
M/ s I’IytaiSt.1n1″I\I§{;lgI1i3’tiCS }L’,.td..,’
Residing at 3.4015; ~Ard.h–an::aV1 Apartme : its–V”:
Sector 13,”R”.K.1’i?urarn._–..___ V
New Delhi’;- <J_,1;o 066. i_ *
Mr. Jayant oshi n g 2
Fathers nat1ne"notik;1,oWn '
To the petitioner-__ V ' 7
Age: Major, Occupation: Director
_?_VI}!.s :IiiytaisuIn"I:/Iagne-tics Ltd.,
_Residing a~t{}, Surashree
' , '1 Road Pune — 411 016.
‘ ‘ A ‘I.\/Ir.
Fathers narne not known
To t.he.gpetitioner
Age: Major, Occupation: Directior
2, it s Hytaisun Magnetics Ltd..
< Residing at 174–b, Twin Towers
Prabhadevi, Mumbai ~ 400023.
-4-
Court noticing that the complainant as well as his advocate
remained absent. even at 3&5 p.m. found that. the complainant
is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Accordingly, it
dismissed the same. Thereafter, this petition has been on
23.8.2004 i.e. nearly after lapse of 1033 days. The
in support of the application for condonation of” K V’
under:
“Para 5: That the accountant 0′
hereinabove was aged ?8 .yea1’s_V
keeping indyferent health. He his
wife in Vasantha
and wife died on the nigh_t’oj” so-. :~.2goa _
Para 6: _A1′-That the _fiheV’.s(.1ticrl” accountant
was “not “either-Hie ‘toflhthe Company. Since
bothflthe “died on the same day,
there could communicate the
new.,S of dea’th.A”~. 00 .0
i__fl5ar_a 7:” attending the matter as and
A called. upon, I did not have full particulars of the
.%Voendr’.ngV0.:before the Court below. Only recently I
0 to about the particulars of the case and on
V enqzutriesl, 01 was informed that the case was dismissed
A. by the impugned order. When I contacted my counsel I
* informed that he was not keeping well on
27.7.2001 and so he could not attend the case and
0 that he already communicated the dismissal of the
case to the aforesaid accountant by a letter.”