SLP in SC

Dear Querist,

Having read the facts, proceduarlly, it is appropriate if you file a caveat petition before the other party file SLP in SC. This will enable you to be present in the admission hearing of the SLP and no order would be passed without hearing you.

As per facts, opposite party has weaker case to push through since both in HC as well as SC, they have delayed their case which would certainly go against them. However, if they can establish the case merits in SC, there may be a situation that Hon'ble SC may issue notice and in appropriate case, stay the effect of the order under challenge along with the Order which was initially in your favour.

Trust this would suffice.

Please revert for any further query.

Rabin Majumder

Advocate-on-Record

Supreme Court of India

New Delhi

Pl clarify

What has become of the Order passed

Has it been implemented

How much time was granted

Can you move Implementation Application  in Distt Court

Or if the Appeal has been rejected on condonation of delay grounds , can you move Contempt in High Court

Why so delay in implementing the Order

Clarify

Our entire problem arises with the word "Hon'ble". Where is it written that the courts should be addressed as Hon'ble. Even persons of two tuppence who become Ministers want to be referred to as Hon'ble and we like slaves follow it. Bureacracy has made us slave.

See Maderna who was Hon'ble Minister in Rajasthan till the other day and now faces arrest and jail in Bhanwari Devi sleaze case.

Mr. Majumder,

Thanks for your response.

Another fact that adds to the case in addition to their delay of 100 days in HC which was not condoned, and 580 days delay till now for SLP in SC, is that the govt dept has also agreed on record that they owe us the award money and have exchanged letters within their department to pay us our dues. But now to our RTI response they have replied that they are planning for an SLP in SC.

They also seem to put all blame of delay in filing SLP (90 days limitation over by another 580 days) on one clerk in the dept and may pray that they were not given a just chance of hearing in the HC. While the fact is that their HC delay was also not condoned on the similar grounds, and the HC order clearly states that their reason for delay was not satisfactory.

We also have a case open in the disctrict court on execution of the HC order, and the district judge has served 12 notices to the govt dept to deposit the dues in the court. But the dept has not obliged so far.

With  the above fact in picture, how much chances do they have that their SLP might get accepted.

What should be our next course of action.

Eagerly waiting for your response.

Thanks

Manish Sharma

Its self Contradictory

When Govt has agreed to pay , how they are moving to Sup Court

How they can put blame on a lower rank clerk

You have nothing to do with their internal wrangling

HAVE YOU APPLIED TO THEM FOR PAYMENT OF AWARD , ATTACHING ALL THE RELEVANT RECORD OR NOT

IF  YES , WHAT IS THEIR RESPONSE

IF NOT , DO IT INSTANTLY TOMMORROW

Write if they do not pay Contempt will be moved

NO POINT IN BEATING AROUND THE BUSH

ACT IMMEDIATELY , IF THE CASE BECOMES SUB-JUDICE in SP COURT  then may take a very long time

REACT TOMMORROW HERE , What YOU HAVE DECIDED ,

THIS IS IN YOUR INTEREST

Agreed  with you sir.. 

For the Beginners.... 

Special leave petition means that you take special permission to be heard in appeal against any High Court/tribunal verdict. Usually any issue decided by the State High Court is considered as final, but if there exist any constitutional issue or legal issue which can only be clarified by the Supreme Court of India then, this leave is granted by the Supreme Court & this is heard as a Civil or Criminal appeal as the case may be. Going to the Supreme Court in appeal should not be considered a matter of right by any one but it is matter of privilege which only the Supreme Court will grant to any individual if there exist an important constitutional or legal issue involved in any case that was not properly interpreted by the concerned High Court against whose judgment you approach the Highest court of the country not otherwise.

If such a delay is on account of extreme miscarriage of justice then a notice might be issued. But you have to lay out very cogently grounds of this extreme injustice which caused the delay.

The verdict by the Dist. Forum for the non-payment of NCD money was in our favour. However, due to scheme of arrangement sactioned by the Bombay HC, I was directed to the Special Committee of the Bombay HC. The Registrar of Bombay HC wrote to me that such a Committee was non-existant. Appeal in the State Commission preferred.The verdict of the State Commission - Schme of Arrangement binding in rem. The question of non-payment of interest on NCD money for the initial one year when the Co. requested to extend investment and when it was not facing financial problem was not touched upon.

Now in which higher forum should the party prefer appeal. The order was passed eight months back. The party has read the order but has not taken the copy. Can the delay be condoned?

Dear Querist,

Please ascertain as to who has directed you to the Special Committee of the Bombay HC as per the sactioned scheme of arrangement. Limitation would start from then since you probably did not have knowledge of said proceedings before Bombay HC.

Please study in detail the contents of Order of rejection passed by State Consumer Commission as well as Bombay HC which allowed Scheme of Arrngement. You may find answer thereafter as to whether you will move NCDRC or Supreme Court.

Trust this would suffice.

Rabin Majumder

Advocate-on-Record

Supreme Court of India

New Delhi

The verdict in favour of the applicant was passede by the Dist. Forum and held the Co. liable to pay. However, since the investors and depositors moved Bombay HC, the Hon. HC passed the scheme of arrangement. However, my point is, the demand note by the present applicant was sent prior to the litigation and no reply was give by the Co M/s JIK Industries, Bombay. Besides, the Co. had come up with the request for extension of investmeent for one more year as they were facing financial crunch due to fire at their works only after the iniitial year of investment. However, they did not pay any interest for the first year also.

When the applicant approached the Bombay HC, he was informed orally that no Special Committee ffor disbursement

While deciding the appeal against the applicant the State Comm. did not touch upon this point. Besides, the request of the applicant to call the trustees was also not referred to  in the verdict.  When the questiion involved is tht of NCD, how the trustees can be allowed to get scot free?

The limitation cannottstart from the date of the Scheme of Arrangement because the complaint was admitted in the Dist. Forum and then in the State Commission.

Please guide me how to teach a lesson to such flybynight Cos. Poor investors lose their hard earned money and no remedy forpunshing such thugs in the country? The statute clearly states that no secured produc tcan be converted into any other product without the consent of the holder, then how can the Bombay HC pass such an order? Representations were made by the holders in the HC but were turned down.