AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN vs M/S S.N. MALHOTRA AND SONS — C.A. No. 6406 - 6407/2008
Case under Section XIV-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010190202008
Filing Date
07-Jul-2008
Registration No
C.A. No. 6406 - 6407/2008
Diary Number
19020/2008
Order Date
30-Jul-2019
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 04-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN
Adv. RACHANA JOSHI ISSAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.M/S S.N. MALHOTRA AND SONS
Adv. CHIRAG M. SHROFF
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Jul-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Jul-2019
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
-
25-Jul-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jul-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
-
24-Jul-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
-
23-Jul-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
-
15-May-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-May-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna
-
20-Jul-2017
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-Apr-2017
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Mar-2015
ROPView PDF
-
25-Mar-2015
ROPView PDF
-
13-Nov-2014
ROPView PDF
-
21-Nov-2011
ROPView PDF
-
22-Oct-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Sep-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Jul-2008
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 6406 - 6407/2008
Case Summary: C.A. No. 006406-006407/2008 The Supreme Court dismissed the Airports Authority of India's appeals on July 30, 2019. The court found that the award amounts (Rs. 34,664 and Rs. 35,159) had already been paid to respondent M/S S.N. Malhotra and Sons, and considering the minimal amount involved, dismissal was warranted. The court left the legal questions raised by the appellant open for future consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts