Full Text
Translation output
$'"'-'27, 29, 31 & 33 tr HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) Nos, 1431/2013, 1436/2013, 1441/2013 & 1447/2013
Ofo DEVENDRA KUMAR KAPUR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Vibhu Bhakru, Sr. Adv. with Mr Subhiksh Vasudev, Adv.
Ofo DEVENDRA KUMAR KAPUR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Vibhu Bhakru, Sr. Adv. with Mr Subhiksh Vasudev, Adv.
VERSUS
THE INSTITUTE OF CHAERTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents
CORAM:
Through: Mr Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv. with Mr
Rakesh Agarwal & Mr Pulkit Agarwal, Advs. for
R-1.
Ms Richa Kapoor, CGSC with Ms Medha Sachdev, Adv. for R-2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
04.03.2013 WP(C) No. 1431/2013 & CM Nos. 2693-2695/2013
WP(C) No. 1436/2013 & CM Nos. 2700-2702/2013 WP(C) No. 1441/2013 & CM Nos. 2708-2709/2013
WP(C) No. 1447/2013 & CM Nos. 2718-2720/2013 After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that m view of the fact that Disciplinary Committee (Committee) has commenced its proceedings in the matter, he would present his case before the said committee both by filing a written statement and placing on record, material which may be available with the petitioner.
In these circumstances, he craves leave to withdraw the captioned writ petitions to approach the said Committee of the ICAI. The only request that the learned counsel for the petitioner makes is that the time to file the written statement be extended.
W.P.(C) Nos, 1431/2013, 1436/2013, 1441/2013 & 1447/2013 Page I of2
_, ''~i
_,•, '··~
2013:DHC:7154 ::- j Learned counsels for respondent nos. 1 and 2 submit that they' would have no objection in the court extending the time for filing the written statement.
The writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The writ petitioner will have the liberty to file a written statement within six weeks from today; a copy of which will be supplied to the complainant.
Needless to say, I have not examined the matter on merits. The
Committee will examine the matter, in detail, including the principal submission of the petitioner that there was no material on record which would show that the petitioner had acted as the de-facto Executive Director
(Finance) ofthe concerned company while acting as its statutory Auditor.
Dasti.
MARCH 04, 2013 kk ')":\.,.\LLJL/ RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
W.P.(C) Nos, 1431/2013, 1436/2013, 144112013 & 1447/2013 Page 2 of2
_,•_, '~!
,,~ 2013:DHC:7154
Rakesh Agarwal & Mr Pulkit Agarwal, Advs. for
R-1.
Ms Richa Kapoor, CGSC with Ms Medha Sachdev, Adv. for R-2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
04.03.2013 WP(C) No. 1431/2013 & CM Nos. 2693-2695/2013
WP(C) No. 1436/2013 & CM Nos. 2700-2702/2013 WP(C) No. 1441/2013 & CM Nos. 2708-2709/2013
WP(C) No. 1447/2013 & CM Nos. 2718-2720/2013 After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that m view of the fact that Disciplinary Committee (Committee) has commenced its proceedings in the matter, he would present his case before the said committee both by filing a written statement and placing on record, material which may be available with the petitioner.
In these circumstances, he craves leave to withdraw the captioned writ petitions to approach the said Committee of the ICAI. The only request that the learned counsel for the petitioner makes is that the time to file the written statement be extended.
W.P.(C) Nos, 1431/2013, 1436/2013, 1441/2013 & 1447/2013 Page I of2
_, ''~i
_,•, '··~
2013:DHC:7154 ::- j Learned counsels for respondent nos. 1 and 2 submit that they' would have no objection in the court extending the time for filing the written statement.
The writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The writ petitioner will have the liberty to file a written statement within six weeks from today; a copy of which will be supplied to the complainant.
Needless to say, I have not examined the matter on merits. The
Committee will examine the matter, in detail, including the principal submission of the petitioner that there was no material on record which would show that the petitioner had acted as the de-facto Executive Director
(Finance) ofthe concerned company while acting as its statutory Auditor.
Dasti.
MARCH 04, 2013 kk ')":\.,.\LLJL/ RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
W.P.(C) Nos, 1431/2013, 1436/2013, 144112013 & 1447/2013 Page 2 of2
_,•_, '~!
,,~ 2013:DHC:7154
JUDGMENT