SHYAM BABU GUPTA THR.LRS. vs M/S.KIRAT CHAND JAIN FAMILY TRUST . — C.A. No. 11322/2013

Case under Section XIV-A. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010183652009

Filing Date

29-Jun-2009

Registration No

C.A. No. 11322/2013

Diary Number

18365/2009

Order Date

27-Aug-2019

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Disposed Off

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XIV-A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHYAM BABU GUPTA THR.LRS.

    Adv. MOHD. IRSHAD HANIF

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/S.KIRAT CHAND JAIN FAMILY TRUST .

    Adv. RAJESH AGGARWAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 27-Aug-2019

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 27-Aug-2019

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indu Malhotra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna

  4. 01-Sep-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 01-Sep-2015

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 01-Sep-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 16-Dec-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 30-Aug-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 16-Aug-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 14-May-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 13-Apr-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 31-Mar-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 10-Mar-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 22-Jan-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 17-Dec-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 11-Nov-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 07-Oct-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 28-Aug-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 27-Jul-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 27-Jul-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 29-Jun-2009

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 11322/2013

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: On 27-08-2019, Civil Appeal No. 11322/2013 (Shyam Babu Gupta v. M/S. Kirat Chand Jain Family Trust) was heard by a bench of Justices Indu Malhotra and Sanjiv Khanna. The appellant failed to appear even on second call. Respondent's counsel stated the matter had been compromised between parties approximately 4-5 years prior, though the compromise document was unavailable. The Court disposed of the appeal as infructuous based on this settlement statement, and all pending applications were dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case