Full Text
Translation output
b DELHI {< 14.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 415012009 ANNAPURNA INDUSTRIAL RES OURCES
LTD & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: \zlr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Ashish Midha. Advocate
VETSUS
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Manmeet Singh, Adv. \ ..... Respondent
15.
./gI-.NI.c. tlllzoog ANNAPURNA INDUSTRIAL RES OURCES
LTD & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Ashish Midha. Advocate
VETSUS
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
Through: Mr.Manmeet Singh, Adv.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 415012009 ANNAPURNA INDUSTRIAL RES OURCES
LTD & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: \zlr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Ashish Midha. Advocate
VETSUS
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Manmeet Singh, Adv. \ ..... Respondent
15.
./gI-.NI.c. tlllzoog ANNAPURNA INDUSTRIAL RES OURCES
LTD & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Ashish Midha. Advocate
VETSUS
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
Through: Mr.Manmeet Singh, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KTIANNA
ORDER o/o 29.08.2011 Though these two matters were referred by the learned Single Judge after noticing conflicts in the decisions rendered in Anita Chsdhs v. petitioner submitted that he has instructions not to press the petitions
2011:DHC:9650 > ) r- ! 2:1 I preferred under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure dod". Learned counsel for the respondent fairly stated that he has no objection for the withdrawal of the petitions but the issue of law be kept open. Needless to emphasise, when the petitioner expressed its intention to withdraw the petitions, this Court need not proceed to answer the reference as that would be a totally academic exercise. In view of the aforesaid and keeping the controversy that has been referred by the learned Single Judge open, the petitions are permitted to be withdrawn. t7';'4
CHIEF JUSTICE a- lr,*- SANJIV KHANNA, J AUGUST 29,2OIT pk
't \ {t 2011:DHC:9650
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KTIANNA
ORDER o/o 29.08.2011 Though these two matters were referred by the learned Single Judge after noticing conflicts in the decisions rendered in Anita Chsdhs v. petitioner submitted that he has instructions not to press the petitions
2011:DHC:9650 > ) r- ! 2:1 I preferred under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure dod". Learned counsel for the respondent fairly stated that he has no objection for the withdrawal of the petitions but the issue of law be kept open. Needless to emphasise, when the petitioner expressed its intention to withdraw the petitions, this Court need not proceed to answer the reference as that would be a totally academic exercise. In view of the aforesaid and keeping the controversy that has been referred by the learned Single Judge open, the petitions are permitted to be withdrawn. t7';'4
CHIEF JUSTICE a- lr,*- SANJIV KHANNA, J AUGUST 29,2OIT pk
't \ {t 2011:DHC:9650
JUDGMENT