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
9 paragraphs · 164 wordsAdmit. No notice need be issued because Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent on advance notice.
On behalf of petitioner, it has been submitted that petitioner’s request for an import licence registration ought to have been allowed without putting
unnecessary condition relating to matters which are in dispute between the parties and pending in the Apex Court. Other issue relates to
petitioner’s request to adjust earlier bank guarantees already furnished which the petitioner claims to be in excess than the requirement in terms
of the licence agreement.
The import licence issue does not appear to involve any pecunary interest of the respondent and, hence, it should be decided on the next date in the
light of reply and rejoinder.  The other issue may await detailed hearing for final adjudication. As prayed, four week’s time is granted for
filing reply. Rejoinder, if required, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Post the matter under the head “For Orders†on 15.7.2021.