1 mgj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Company Application No.694 of 2009 with Company Application No.767 of 2009 in Company Appeal( Ld) No.31 of 2009 1 Mrs Shakeela Sultan Maredia and others ..Appellants vs. 1 Hotel Maredias Private Limited and others ..Respondents and Hotel Maredias Pvt.Ltd. ..Applicants vs. 1 Mrs.Shakeela Sultan Maredia and others ..Respondents Mr.Hiten Venegaonkiar with Mr.Roopesh Jaiswal for appellants Mr.B.B.Parikh for respondents. CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA J. 2nd September, 2009 P.C. 1 This company Application is taken out by the applicant/original respondent no.1 2 to 10F appeal Lodging No.31 of 2009 disposed of by this Court by its order dated 8th May, 2009. From the said order dated 8th May 2009 it is noted that the applicant had assured this Court that they will offer inspection of all the documents as may be requisitioned by the appellants which may be relevant for assessing the valuation of the shares including the books of account and balance sheet for the relevant period. The assurance of the applicant through their Counsel was accepted by the Court. 2 By this application the applicants have prayed that they be relieved of their statement/assurance recorded in the order dated 8th May 2009 since the original appellants are seeking inspection also of the documents which are not encompassed by the said order If that be so, in my view, the applicants cannot seek to be relieved from the assurance given by them to the Court and 3 accepted by the Court. It is submitted that the applicants apprehend that the respondents (original appellants) shall take out proceedings alleging breach of the assurance. If such application is taken out the respondents are always free to point out what they have submitted before this Court viz. that the inspection sought by the respondents is beyond the scope of the assurance given by them to the Court and accepted by the Court. Of-course, the correctness of the submissions made by the applicant will be decided by the Court hearing such application. In view thereof the company application no.694 of 2009 stands dismissed with no order as to costs. 3 As far as company application no.767 of 2009 is concerned, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant in the said application, on instructions seeks to withdraw the said application. Hence Company 4 Application No.767 of 200 is dismissed as withdrawn. (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.)