AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 240 wordsLearned Counsel for Petitioner and Ms Mohini, appearing for Official Liquidator in connected Petition of Item No. 3 i.e. BP No. 223 of 2016, firstly mention that she is not representing Official Liquidator in this Petition No. 506 of 2015. Rather is appearing for Official Liquidator in BP No. 223 of 2016. Learned Counsel for Petitioner, mentioned that Respondent - Tulip Telecom Limited, is one and common company, in both of these Petitions, which is being said to be under liquidation and Official Liquidator, in one Petition, chooses to appear and not to appear in other Petition, to the best of her choice and understanding. It is a foul trick being played by Official liquidator.
Vide Order dated 01.09.2023, an opportunity for filing update status of liquidation proceeding was taken by Official liquidator and it has not been complied with. A question was raised to Counsel appearing for Official Liquidator as to why this conduct be not reported to Hon'ble High Court, who had given authority of Official liquidator to this Official liquidator. Counsel requested for one and last opportunity for getting instruction and appropriate steps for appearing in this Petition, for and on behalf of Official liquidator and making compliance of filing of status of liquidation on this Petition.
Under above facts and circumstances, and assurance given by this Counsel named above, today's proceeding in both the cases, has been adjourned for 06.12.2023 'for further disposal'.
