Case Details

Ms Mongia Steel Ltd Through Its Managing Director Sri Gunwant Singh Saluja Vs Ms Saluja Steel And Power Pvt Ltd Through Its Managing Director Sri Amarjeet Singh Saluja

Case Details

casenoCase TypeCOM.APPEAL
casenoFiling NumberCOM.APPEAL /5361/2018
casenoRegistration NumberCOM.APPEAL /2/2018
caseno Filing Date08-05-2018
hearingRegistration Date10-05-2018
dateDecision Date16th September 2020
casestatusCase StatusCase Disposed
natureNature of DisposalContested--Dismissed As Withdrawn;
coramCoram24858-Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh , Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
bench typeBench TypeDivision Bench
judicalJudical BranchCivil Section
districtDistrictRanchi
stateStateJHARKHAND

Petitioners & Respondents

contactsPetitioner

Ms Mongia Steel Ltd Through Its Managing Director Sri Gunwant Singh Saluja, ;

contactsPetitioner Advocate

Rohitashya Roy Alis Rohit RoyJagdeeshjagdeesh Sumeet GadodiaRanjeet KushwahaShilpi SandilVinamra Agr Show more..

contacts Respondent Name

Ms Saluja Steel And Power Pvt Ltd Through Its Managing Director Sri Amarjeet Singh Saluja;

contactsRespondent Advocate

Prashant Pallav Navneet SahaySmita SinhaParth Jalan;

Order Details

orderdate Order Date04-06-2020 documents

jhc_logo IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Com. Appeal No. 2 of 2018 --- M/s Mongia Steel Ltd. --- --- Appellant Versus M/s Saluja Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. ---Respondent --- CORAM : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary Through: Video Conferencing --- For the Appellant : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate Ms. Shilpi John, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate --- 05/04.06.2020 Learned counsel Mr. Prasant Pallav enters appearance on behalf of the respondent on notice and undertakes to file Vakalatnama within 2 weeks. He seeks further 4 weeks’ time to file response, as according to him, there are certain developments which have also taken place since passing of the impugned order dated 6th April, 2018 whereby application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C was dismissed by the learned Commercial Court. Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, assisted by learned counsel Ms. Shilpi John, is present. 4 weeks’ time, as prayed for, is allowed to the learned counsel for the respondent to file response with copy to the other side. 1 week time thereafter is allowed to the learned counsel for the appellant to file rejoinder, if required. Matter be listed after 5 weeks under the same heading. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary,J) jk/

orderdate Order Date31-08-2020 documents

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Commercial Appeal No. 2 of 2018 M/s Mongia Steel Ltd --- --- Appellant Versus M/s Saluja Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. --- --- Respondent --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary Through: Video Conferencing --- For the Appellant: Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Parth Jalan, Advocate --- 06/ 31.08.2020 Mr. Sumeet Gadodia for the appellant and Mr. Parth Jalan for the Respondent are present through Video Conferencing. 2. Response in terms of the order dated 04.06.2020 has not been filed by Learned Counsel for the Respondent. By way of last indulgence, he seeks one week time. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks short time thereafter to file rejoinder, if so necessary. 3. Accordingly, let the matter be listed on 16.09.2020. Affidavit in response be filed by 08.09.2020 with copy through e-mail by the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant would file rejoinder, if any, by 14.09.2020. Short synopsis and the decisions on which learned counsel for the parties seek to rely can be sent through e-mail to the Court Master latest by 4.30 pm on 14.09.2020. 4. List it accordingly. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J) Ranjeet/

orderdate Order Date16-09-2020 documents

legal IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Commercial Appeal No. 2 of 2018 M/s Mongia Steel Ltd. (formerly Mongia Hi-Tech Pvt. Ltd.) having its Office at Buriyadih, Giridih through its Managing Director, Sri Gunwant Singh Saluja R/o Giridih Town, Giridih --- --- Appellant Versus M/s Saluja Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. having its office at Bhandhairdih, Giridih through its Managing Director, Sri Amerjeet Singh Saluja, R/o of Giridih Town, Giridih --- --- Respondent ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY Through Video Conferencing For the Appellant : Mr. Rahul Saboo, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate 07/16.09.2020 Learned counsel Mr. Rahul Saboo has entered appearance on behalf of the appellant after obtaining no objection from the erstwhile counsel Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, who has also joined the proceedings and submitted that he has given no objection to the clients. Mr. Saboo states on instructions that appellant seek permission to withdraw this appeal. Learned counsel Mr. Prashant Pallav appears for the respondent. He does not object to the prayer. In view of the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Rahul Saboo on instructions, instant writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) A.Mohanty

orderdate Order Date28-09-2020 documents

legal IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Commercial Appeal No. 2 of 2018 M/s Mongia Steel Ltd. (formerly Mongia Hi-Tech Pvt. Ltd.) having its Office at Buriyadih, Giridih through its Managing Director, Sri Gunwant Singh Saluja R/o Giridih Town, Giridih --- --- Appellant Versus M/s Saluja Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. having its office at Bhandhairdih, Giridih through its Managing Director, Sri Amerjeet Singh Saluja, R/o of Giridih Town, Giridih --- --- Respondent ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY Through Video Conferencing For the Appellant : Mr. Rahul Saboo, Advocate For the Respondent : 08/28.09.2020 Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Rahul Saboo submits that typographical error has crept in the order dated 16.09.2020 in the second last sentence wherein, instead of ‘commercial appeal’, the expression ‘writ petition’ has been typed. Office has placed the matter for modification in the order dated 16.09.2020 to that extent. It appears that in the second last sentence of the order dated 16.09.2020, inadvertently the expression ‘writ petition’ has been typed, although the instant matter is a commercial appeal, which has been dismissed as withdrawn. Accordingly, in the second last sentence of the order dated 16.09.2020, the word ‘commercial appeal’ be read instead of ‘writ petition’. The order dated 16.09.2020 be read along with the instant order. With the aforesaid modification, let the case be consigned to the records. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) A.Mohanty