IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1042 of 2010 Date of Decision: 21.01.2011 C.B.Bhave and others ...Appellants Versus Surbhi Makkar and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr. O.P.Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Shilpa Sahi, Advocate, for the appellants. Dr. Pawan Kumar Aryan, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Puneet Kansal, Advocate, for respondent No.3- CEO-Carvy Stock Broking Ltd. Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate, for respondent No.5-National Stock Exchange of India. **** RANJAN GOGOI, A.C.J.(Oral) CM Nos. 3122-3123 of 2010 Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the applications, delay of 95 days in filing as well as 95 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. Both the applications shall stand disposed of. LPA No. 1042 of 2010 Notice of motion. Dr. Pawan Kumar Aryan, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1, whereas Mr. Puneet Kansal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3, and Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.5. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing on Board. LPA No. 1042 of 2010 [2] An apparent innocuous direction given by the learned Single Judge contained in penultimate paragraph of the order dated 11.11.2009 passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 13857 of 2008 has been challenged in this appeal. The said challenge is primarily on the ground that the requirement of passing orders by the appellant Board on the representation of the petitioner Annexure P-4, has the effect of creating a legal precedent which may unnecessarily bind the appellant Board which receives a large number of applications/representations of the investors. Infact, learned counsel for the appellant board has submitted that on receipt of communication/representation (Annexure P-4), the matter was referred to the National Stock Exchange and thereafter as per the agreement between the Stock Exchange and the broker, the matter was gone into in an arbitration proceeding wherein the award has also been passed. The above action already taken along with the fact whether any default under Chapter VI-A had been committed on the allegations made and if so the action proposed on that basis be communicated to the respondents-writ petitioners. The present direction will not be construed as a precedent in future to bind the appellant Board to any particular course of action in future. With the aforesaid directions, the appeal stands disposed of. (RANJAN GOGOI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) 21.01.2011 JUDGE 'ravinder'