SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.41 OF 1990 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.77 OF 1990 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.181 OF 1990 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.433 OF 1990 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.161 OF 1999 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.373 OF 1992 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.520 OF 1992 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.140 OF 1995 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION NO.714 OF 1996 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION (LODGING) NO.926 OF 2003 Jer Ruttan Kavasmaneck alias Jer Jawahar Thadani & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus Gharda Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents WITH COMPANY APPLICATION (LODGING) NO.1241 OF 2005 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION (LODGING) NO.1250 OF 2005 WITH COMPANY APPLICATION (LODGING) NO.1266 OF 2005 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.77 OF 1990 Dr.Percy Rutton Kavasmaneck & Anr. ...Petitioners Versus Gharda Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents : 2 : ....... Mr.Sunip K.Sen with Mr.Shehzad A.K.Najam-es-Sani i/b Mr.Reza A.K.Najam-es-Sani for Applicants (Ori.Respondents 1, 2 & 4). Mr.Kevic Sethalvad i/b D.H.Law & Associates for Petitioners. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. NOVEMBER 14, 2008. NOVEMBER 14, 2008. NOVEMBER 14, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The above said applications except the last three applications were listed along with main Company Petition being Company Petition No.77 of 1990 for hearing. However, no separate argument with reference to reliefs claimed in the respective applications was advanced in any of these applications. Counsel appearing in the respective applications fairly agreed that all these applications will be governed by the decision in the main Company Petition and can be disposed of on that basis. In other words, it is agreed between the parties that the Court need not decide the issues raised in any of these Applications separately or consider granting relief claimed : 3 : therein. 2. Accordingly, all these Applications will have to be disposed of in terms of the decision in the main Company Petition. 3. Insofar as the last three Applications are concerned, the same were not on Board when the hearing of the main Company Petition was in progress and concluded. However, the Registry has now pointed out that these three Applications were left out and not listed. Counsel appearing for the parties fairly submit that even these Applications be disposed of on the same basis as referred to above in view of the decision rendered in the main Company Petition. 4. Accordingly, all these Applications are disposed of on the above terms. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.