IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY APPLICATION (L) NO. 5 OF 2006 APPLICATION (L) NO. 5 OF 2006 APPLICATION (L) NO. 5 OF 2006 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 118 OF 2005 Nutankumar Pal Sheth & Ors .... Appllicant versus M/s. Jaysynth Dyestuff (India) Limited & ors. ... Respondents. Mr. Rahul Nanichania i/b Harish Joshi & Co. for Petitioner. Mrr. D.J. Khambhatta i/b Kanga & Co. for Respondent no.1. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas i/b. Hemant Sethi for Respondent no.2. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED; DATED; DATED; FEBRUARY 01, 2006. FEBRUARY 01, 2006. FEBRUARY 01, 2006. P.C: P.C: P.C: 1. By an order dated 30-01-2006 I had, for reasons stated therein, permitted the application to be made without notice to the respondent and ordered that the order of the Company Law Board dated 27-12-2005 would continue till 6th February 2006. 2. A praecipe has been filed by the petitioner dated 31-01-2006 pursuant to which the matter has been placed on board today. The petitioner’s advocate has correctly and fairly brought to my notice that the respondent had in fact filed a caveat in the matter, however, through in advertance the same was not brought to my notice for the reasons stated in the praecipe. 3. On principle, in view of the caveat, the order dated 30-01-2006 is vacated. By consent the Company Application is adjourned to tomorrow at 3.00 p.m. ...