- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Chitra Sharma And Others v. Union Of India And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
The order concerns ongoing proceedings related to construction projects undertaken by JAL and JIL and the rights of homebuyers affected by those projects. On the date of this order, the respondents, through senior counsel Mr. Fali S. Nariman, submitted unspecified proposals. These proposals were “seriously opposed” by counsel for the petitioners, leading the Court to refuse consideration of the proposals at this stage. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether and to what extent homebuyers possess enforceable rights in relation to the construction projects undertaken by JAL and JIL.
- Whether JAL and JIL have the capability to complete the construction projects in question.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court noted that the proposals advanced by the respondents were forcefully opposed by the petitioners. In light of this opposition, the Court declined to entertain the proposals at this juncture. Recognizing the need for focused deliberation on substantive issues, the Court:
- Scheduled the matter for 16-07-2018 exclusively to address the rights of homebuyers and the construction capability of JAL and JIL.
- Requested the presence of Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Senior Counsel for the Interim Resolution Professional, to assist the Court.
- Directed opposing counsel to file written notes of submissions, limiting oral arguments to five minutes per counsel and prohibiting multiple submissions.
Holding and Implications
The Court declined to entertain the respondents’ proposals and fixed 16-07-2018 for further hearing on the specified issues.
Immediate implications include the requirement for opposing counsel to submit written arguments and the participation of the Interim Resolution Professional at the next hearing. The order does not establish new precedent; its effects are limited to procedural management of the ongoing case.
Order
1. Mr Fali S. Nariman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, has given certain proposals. The same are seriously opposed to by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain the said proposals.
2. Let the matter be listed on 16-7-2018, exclusively for the purpose of considering the issue of the rights of the homebuyers and the capability of JAL and JIL to construct the projects.
3. Mr Parag P. Tripathi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) is requested to remain present on the next date of hearing to assist the Court. That apart, the learned counsel who are opposing the proposals, are directed to file written notes of submissions. Oral submissions by the learned counsel shall be restricted to five minutes each. Needless to say, each counsel shall address the Court only once and multiple submissions shall not be entertained.
Court Masters
Alert