Union of
India & Ors Vs. M/S Jayant Oils & Derivatives Ltd & Ors [2009] INSC
536 (16 March 2009)
Judgment
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Interlocutory Application
Nos. 4-5 In Transfer Petition (C) No. 945 of 2006 Union of India & Ors.
...Petitioner(s) VERSUS M/s Jayant Oils & Derivatives Ltd. & Ors.
.Respondent(s)
O R D E R
TARUN CHATTERJEE,J.
1.
Delay condoned.
2.
This is an application for restoration of the Transfer Petition
being T.P. No. 945 of 2006 as against the respondent, on whom notices have been
served and also for a direction that the order of the dismissal would operate
only against those respondents whose addresses were not furnished by the
petitioners and for other incidental reliefs.
3.
It appears from the record that the petitioners were required to
file process fee and copies of the Transfer Petition and the Amendment Petition
with correct addresses of all the respondents for effecting service of notice
on the respondents.
However,
Petitioners filed an application before this Court seeking an exemption from
filing spare copies of annexures attached to the Transfer Petition. The
application for exemption was disallowed by this Court by an order dated 8th of
May, 2007. Accordingly, the petitioners were directed to take steps to file the
process fee and spare copies. Since the petitioners did not comply with the office
report dated 8th of May, 2007, directing the petitioners to file process fee
and to furnish correct and latest address of the some of the respondents, the
matter was placed before Hon'ble The Chamber Judge on 24th of July, 2008 when
the following order was passed :- 3 "If requisite steps in compliance with
the Office Report dated 22.04.2008 are not taken within four weeks, the
Transfer Petition shall stand dismissed."
4.
Subsequent to this order, the petitioners filed an application
seeking extension of time to comply with the office report dated 22nd of April,
2008 and the order dated 24th of July, 2008. However, the said application was
not listed because it was barred by time by four days. Since the petitioners
have not complied with the office report dated 22nd of April, 2008 i.e. for
want of correct addresses of the respondents, the Transfer Petition stood
dismissed for non-compliance of the said office report.
5.
Now, this application has been filed for restoration of the
Transfer Petition, praying for restoration as against the respondents on whom
the notices were served. There has also been a prayer for a direction upon the
Department that the dismissal 4 order would operate only against those
respondents whose addresses were not furnished by the petitioners.
6.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going
through the statements made in the application, we allow the application for
restoration and direct the Transfer Petition to be restored to its original
file only against the respondents on whom notices have already been served. The
order of dismissal would operate only against those respondents whose addresses
were not furnished by the petitioners.
7.
Accordingly, the application for restoration is allowed to the
extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.
..............................J. [TARUN CHATTERJEE]
NEW DELHI;
....................... .......J. 5 MARCH 16, 2009. [H. L.]
Back
