w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Praveen Arjun Patel v/s J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd


Company & Directors' Information:- CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1965GOI004322

Company & Directors' Information:- JK LAKSHMI CEMENT LIMITED [Active] CIN = L74999RJ1938PLC019511

Company & Directors' Information:- J. K. CEMENT LIMITED. [Active] CIN = L17229UP1994PLC017199

Company & Directors' Information:- CEMENT INDIA LTD [Active] CIN = U26942AS1994PLC004154

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAVEEN INDIA LTD . [Active] CIN = L21029WB1983PLC036326

Company & Directors' Information:- S. P. CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U26940MP2006PTC018404

Company & Directors' Information:- S. P. CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01531MP2006PTC018404

Company & Directors' Information:- S D CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC072298

Company & Directors' Information:- P B CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36900WB2009PTC138825

Company & Directors' Information:- K G N CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U26942OR1991PTC002930

Company & Directors' Information:- V K CEMENT LTD [Active] CIN = U26942PB1994PLC014122

Company & Directors' Information:- J D CEMENT PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U26941CH1982PTC004960

Company & Directors' Information:- B S CEMENT PVT. LTD. [Active] CIN = U26942OR1986PTC001767

Company & Directors' Information:- M P CEMENT PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U26942CT1984PTC002333

Company & Directors' Information:- J K CEMENT PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U26941GJ1981PTC004569

Company & Directors' Information:- ARJUN CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U26941UP1995PTC018898

Company & Directors' Information:- R. M. CEMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U26941CT2009PTC021396

Company & Directors' Information:- A R CEMENT CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U02694MP1982PTC002042

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAVEEN & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1999PTC098397

Company & Directors' Information:- K L CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U26940WB2008PTC127270

Company & Directors' Information:- PATEL CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1981PTC025575

Company & Directors' Information:- R S CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U74899DL1992PTC047484

Company & Directors' Information:- S. K. CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U26960WB2012PTC187806

Company & Directors' Information:- D & D CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U26941GJ2009PTC057912

    I.A. Nos. 1140-1142 of 2018 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 264 of 2018

    Decided On, 21 August 2018

    At, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. BALVINDER SINGH TECHNICAL MEMBER

    For the Appellant: Santosh Kumar, Sanjeev Arora, Pankaj Bhagat, Amitav Bachchan, Tusharika Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent: Amit P. Deshpandey, Advocate.



Judgment Text

Balvinder Singh, Technical Member:

1. These three IAs being IA No. 1140, 1141 and 1142 of 2018 have been filed by the respective applicants being aggrieved of the order dated 12.6.2018 passed by this Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 264 of 2018, Praveen Arjun Patel, through Ravi Kant Seth v. J.K. Lakshi Cement Ltd. In all these three IAs the applicants have sought the following reliefs:

(a). Recall and/or modify the order dated 12.6.2018 to make the same in line or in sync with the mandate of Section 12A of the IBC in the manner as may be deemed fit, just, proper and in the interest of;

(b). Stay the operation of the order dated 12.6.2018 passed by this Appellate Tribunal till the disposal of the present application or direct the learned Adjudicating Authority, Principal Bench, NCLT, Delhi not to pass any order permitting withdrawal of Section 9 application by J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd, till the disposal of the present application;

(c). Pass ad-interim ex parte orders in terms of prayer (b) above;

(d). Pass any other order as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The brief facts in all the three IAs are similar. The applicants have stated that the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi was pleased to admit application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the operational creditor against the corporate debtor, namely, PAN Realtors Pvt Ltd. Accordingly an interim resolution professional for the corporate debtor was appointed and claims from the creditors of PAN Realtors Pvt. Ltd. were invited. Applicants herein filed their claims before the due date i.e. 4.6.2018 before the IRP. Applicants further stated that they enquired about the status of their claim from IRP and the IRP informed that Appellate Tribunal has passed an order on 12.6.2018 recording the settlement arrived at between the operational creditor and the corporate debtor and the IRP showed their inability to proceed further with the claims filed by the creditors including the present applicants. Applicants further stated that they obtained a copy of the order dated 12.6.2018 and came to know that the appeal filed by one Mr. Praveen Arjun Patel on behalf of the corporate debtor was listed on 30.5.2018 and was adjourned to 2.7.2018. It is further stated that the corporate debtor in connivance with the operational creditor filed an application for recording of settlement before the Appellate Tribunal which was listed before the Vacation Bench and the Bench ordered that in view of the settlement arrived at, the parties were allowed to withdraw Section 9 application.

3. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 12.6.2018 the applicants have filed respective IAs thereby stating that on 6.6.2018 the Hon’ble President had promulgated the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 by which certain provisions of IBC have been amended and as per that amendment, Section 12 A of the IBC provides that the Adjudicating Authority may allow the withdrawal of application admitted under Section 7 or Section 9 or Section 10, on an application made by the applicant with the approval of ninety percent voting share of the committee of creditors, in such manner as may be prescribed.

4. In view of the above amendment in Section 12A of the IBC, the applicants have stated that the order dated 12.6.2018 passed by this Appellate Tribunal permitting unilateral withdrawal of Section 9 application by the operational creditor without the approval of the 90% of the voting share in the Committee of Creditors of the corporate debtor is contrary to the said mandate and deserves to be recalled/modified. The applicants have further stated that the order dated 12.6.2018 is against the letter and spirit of Section 12A of the IBC and the said order has caused serious prejudice to the other creditors of the corporate debtor including the present applicants herein. The applicants have further stated that the corporate debtor and operational creditor have acted in connivance with each by settling the matter without knowledge/consent of the Committee of Creditors by-passing the provisions of law. The applicants further stated that the settlement arrived at between the parties is behind the back of the other creditors to their detriment and prejudice. The applicants have further stated that the operational creditor and corporate debtor acted in hand in glove with each other and have not presented the true and correct legal position before this Appellate Tribunal when the order dated 12.6.2018 was passed. Further the operational creditor and corporate debtor got the date of hearing fixed by this Tribunal preponed and filed the application before the Vacation Bench without intimating the other creditors and even to IRP.

5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.

6. Learned Counsel for the applicants have argued that the operational creditor and corporate debtor in connivance with each other and without informing the Appellate Tribunal about the amendment in Section 12A of the IBC persuaded it and the order dated 12.6.2018 have been passed in ignorance of the said amendment. Learned Counsel for the applicants further argued that approval of 90 per cent voting share of committee of creditors have not been taken. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that the order dated 12.6.2018 passed by the Appellate Tribunal amounts to exceeding jurisdiction as the same has been passed in complete ignorance of the provisions and mandate of Section 12A of the IBC 2016.

7. Learned Counsel for the applicants rebutted the arguments of the corporate debtor that the order dated 12.6.2018 has been passed in the light of natural justice is misconceived as natural justice cannot take away vital rights accrued in favour of the applicants by virtue of Section 12 A of the IBC 2016. Learned Counsel for the applicants further argued that without compliance of statutory provisions cannot be held to be for natural justice. In the order dated 12.6.2018 the rights of the Committee of Creditors and all other applicants have been affected as the settlement is to the detriment of all the stake holders and the corporate debtor would suffer no injury. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that the reliance placed by the applicants in the case of International Recreation & Amusement v. S.R. Construction is bad as the same is distinguishable both in facts and law. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that the said judgment is much prior to promulgation of Ordinance, 2018 and the issue before the Appellate Tribunal in the case of International Recreation case was that no notice was received by the corporate debtor therein. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that the order dated 12.6.2018 has been passed by non-compliance of statutory provisions.

8. Learned Counsel for the appellant argued that the persons who are not parties to judgment/order have no locus standi to the file the application for recall/modify of the order 12.6.2018. Learned Counsel for the appellants further argued that the mere disagreement with view of the judgment/order cannot be ground for invoking jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal for recall of the order. Learned Counsel for the appellants further argued that the application for recall of the order dated 12.6.2018 is not maintainable as the applicants have neither pleaded nor contended that glaring omission has crept. Learned Counsel for the appellants further argued that application for recall of the order cannot be permitted to reopen a concluded matter.

9. Learned Counsel for the appellants argued that the order dated 12.6.2018 does not create any embargo for applicants to move before appropriate Forum. Learned Counsel for the appellants argued that the remedy is available to the applicants to get adjudication of its grievance. The applications moved by the applicants for recall of the order dated 12.6.2018 is abuse of the process of Court. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that Section 12A of the IBC (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 is not applicable in the facts and conspectus of the case and is applicable to the Adjudicating Authority under the Statute. Learned Counsel for the applicants argued that the committee of creditors was not formed, therefore, the pre-requisite condition of the applicability of Section 12 A of the IBC does not arise.

10. Having heard the arguments of both the parties it is to say that Section 12A of IBC would be applicable when admission for insolvency resolution application has been admitted by the Adjudicating Authority and there is no challenge to the admission of the application. Subsequently the Adjudicating Authority may allow the withdrawal of application in terms of Section 12A and obviously the admitted application for withdrawal will have to meet the criteria as specified in the said Section. However,

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

in this case admission of the application filed under Section 9 of the IBC Code was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal which has set aside the admission. Consequently, there is no valid admission of the application under IBC Code. In these circumstances the position for withdrawal of application will be in terms of Rule 8 of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. Therefore, there is no impact of Section 12A on this decision in this case. 11. In terms of Section 9 of the Code any operational creditor can initiate insolvency resolution proceedings. Therefore, the applicants herein have their rights protected by IBC that they are entitled to initiate insolvency resolution proceedings and withdrawal of this application by a third party does not impact their rights under the IBC. 12. In the light of the above observations, I do not find any merit in these applications and are accordingly dismissed. Applications dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

11-09-2020 M/s. S.M. Cement Industries Rep. By One of Its Partners Namely, Manoj Sureka, Assam Versus Power Distribution Company Ltd. & Others High Court of Gauhati
02-09-2020 J.K. White Cement Works, Uttar Pradesh Versus Rajender Kumar & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-08-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Astha Cement Pvt. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
31-07-2020 M/s. The Ramco Cements Ltd., Cement Grinding Unit, Kancheepuram Versus Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (South Zonal Bench), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2020 A. Praveen Kumar Versus The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Egmore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-06-2020 M/s. Bharat Cement Distributors, Near Sabzi Mandi Proprietor & Another Versus R.C. Garg, J.E. (Civil) & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 State of Telangana Versus Polepaka Praveen @ Pawan Supreme Court of India
28-04-2020 Praveen Kumar @ Prashant Versus State of GNCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
28-04-2020 Praveen Kumar @ Prashant Versus State & Others High Court of Delhi
07-04-2020 Ultra Tech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Rajasthan
18-03-2020 Praveen Kumar Versus M/s. RPS Infrastructure Limited, New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-03-2020 R. Praveen Versus The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-02-2020 Praveen Kumar Khariwal Versus State of M.P. & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
18-02-2020 Nisha Praveen Patil Versus Praveen Manohar Patil High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
12-02-2020 Praveen Kumar Sharma Versus State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary (Home), Secretariat, Lucknow, U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
11-02-2020 Praveen Kumar Chaudhary & Others Versus Election Commission of India & Others High Court of Delhi
05-02-2020 Sheo Shakti Cement Industries, Hazaribagh Versus State of Jharkhand High Court of Jharkhand
04-02-2020 Praveen, Proprietor Versus Sumesh, KaleeckalVeedu, KrishnapuramMuri, Krishnapuram & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
30-01-2020 Praveen & Another Versus Baby Ulhahnan & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
28-01-2020 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus M/s. J.K. Cement Works Supreme Court of India
27-01-2020 Pankaj Kumar Versus Praveen Jain High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
22-01-2020 The Occupier R.C. Sodani, M/s JSW Cement Limited, Bilakalaguda (V), Gadivemula (M), Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh Versus The State of AP represented by the Assistant Labour Officer-II, represented by P.P. High Court High Court of Andhra Pradesh
17-01-2020 P.V. Philip Versus Praveen & Another High Court of Kerala
08-01-2020 Praveen Versus State of Karnataka High Court of Karnataka
03-01-2020 M/s. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited, Represented by its Deputy Executive Director, R. Gururajan, Chennai Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-12-2019 M/s. Dalmia Magnesite Corporation (Prop. Dalmia Cement [Bharat] Ltd.,) Salem, Rep. by its General Manager, S. Veeraraghavan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-12-2019 Shalimar Iron and Steel Private Limited, Ramgarh Cantt. through its Director Rafat Praveen Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others High Court of Jharkhand
19-11-2019 M/s. J.K. Cement Limited, Represented by its Assistant Manager Sanjay Naik Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary Commerce & Industries Department, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
17-10-2019 Praveen Kumar Prakash & Others Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others Supreme Court of India
11-10-2019 R. Jaikrishnan @ Jaikrishnan Nair Versus G. Praveen Kumar High Court of Kerala
23-08-2019 M/s. Maratha Cement Works, (A Unit of Gujrat Ambuja Cement Ltd.) Versus Vaishali & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
10-07-2019 Kishore Kumar Khaitan & Another Versus Praveen Kumar Singh High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
03-07-2019 Union of India & Others Versus Ultra Tech Cement Limited & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
14-06-2019 Y.A. Praveen & Another Versus Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, Neervaram, Wayanad High Court of Kerala
21-05-2019 Joginder Singh Chauhan & Another Versus Praveen Dulta Chauhan & Others High Court of Himachal Pradesh
01-05-2019 Praveen Singh Ramakant Bhadauriya Versus Neelam Praveen Singh Bhadauriya Supreme Court of India
16-04-2019 Living Media India Limited & Another Versus Vijayan Madhavan Praveen & Another High Court of Delhi
16-04-2019 Praveen Gupta Versus State & Another High Court of Delhi
08-04-2019 Praveen Chand Shrivastava Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Law & Legislature, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
03-04-2019 Praveen Kapila Versus Navin Soi & Another High Court of Delhi
01-04-2019 Praveen Kumar Kommineni Versus The State High Court of Delhi
05-03-2019 Bharat Hi-Tech (Cement) Private Limited Versus Ajay Sengupta & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
22-02-2019 Praveen Versus The Regional Transport Officer, Palakkad & Others High Court of Kerala
14-02-2019 Cement Workers' Mandal Versus Global Cements Ltd. (HMP Cements Ltd.) & Others Supreme Court of India
04-02-2019 B. Praveen Kumar Versus The Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, Tuticorin & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
31-01-2019 Maithili Manhar Siswawala Versus Praveen Kenneth Samuel James High Court of Judicature at Bombay
30-01-2019 M/s. Ashodaya Cement Products, Rep. by its Partner G. Harish & Others Versus Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd., Rep. by Managing Director & Others High Court of Karnataka
30-01-2019 Shree Cement Ltd. & Others Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Rajasthan
25-01-2019 M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd., Rep. By its Company Secretary S. Hariharan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Principal Secretary to the Government Department of Revenue, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-01-2019 Praveen Kumar Arora Versus Akshay High Court of Delhi
08-01-2019 Praveen Kakar & Others Versus Ministry of Environment & Forests & Others National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
14-12-2018 The Director of Insurance Medical Services, Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus Dr. V. Praveen High Court of Kerala
27-11-2018 Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority Versus Birla Super Bulk Terminal (Now A Unit of Ultra Tech Cement Ltd.) & Others Supreme Court of India
22-11-2018 Praveen Kumar Jain Versus Jagdish Prasad Gupta & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
15-11-2018 Ch. Praveen Kumar Versus The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, General Administration Department & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
12-11-2018 M/s. Chettinad Cement Corpn., Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-11-2018 Kushal Praveen Kumar Jain Versus Ito Non Corporate Ward 5(1) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai
06-11-2018 Sangwan Heights Pvt. Ltd. Versus Praveen Chandra Trivedi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-11-2018 The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department & Another Versus M/s. Karnatak Cement Pipe Factory, Engineers & Contractors In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
22-10-2018 Khandya Praveen @ Praveen Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
22-10-2018 Praveen Poddar Versus Securities & Exchange Board of India, SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
27-09-2018 Meghna Gopal Versus Praveen Chandran High Court of Kerala
04-09-2018 Star Cement Meghalaya & Another Versus The State of Assam Rep. By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
13-08-2018 M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. Ariyalur, Rep.by its Company Secretary, S. Hariharan, Chennai Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Principal Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-08-2018 Manjunath Dasappa & Others Versus Trans Global Power Ltd., Represented by its Authorised Signatory T.K. Praveen High Court of Karnataka
08-08-2018 Praveen Agarwal, Agra Versus Dcit Central Circle, Agra Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Agra
07-08-2018 Praveen Singh @ Bhaya Singh Versus State High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
06-08-2018 J.K. Cement Works Versus CE & ST-Dehradun Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
02-08-2018 M/s. Sri Lakshmi Saraswathi Spintex Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director C.S. Aditya Praveen Versus Director General of Foreign Trade, Policy Relaxation Committee, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-07-2018 Praveen Pandey Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh
27-07-2018 P. Rithika, Minor, rep. by her father and guardian P. Praveen Versus Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource and Development, School Education Department, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2018 Orient Cement Limited Versus Ramesh Dhannu Baviskar & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
18-07-2018 Siddavarapu Anantha Sigvarama Krishna Reddy Versus Penna Cement Industries Limited (PICL) & Others In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
13-07-2018 Praveen John Versus State & Another High Court of Delhi
12-07-2018 Ajayapal Singh (D) Through Lrs. Versus Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Supreme Court of India
10-07-2018 Pramod Versus Cement Corporation of India (CCI) High Court of Delhi
09-07-2018 The District Collector Office of the District Collector, Cuddalore District & Another Versus M/s. Chettinadu Cement Corporation, By its Managing Director, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-07-2018 Asma Praveen Versus Badru Nisa & Others High Court of Delhi
22-06-2018 Saurashtra Cement Limited V/S C.C. Jamnagar (Prev.) Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad
20-06-2018 M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise ? LTU Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
01-06-2018 Cement Division Unit of Kesoram Industries Limited V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Hyderabad-I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Hyderabad
25-05-2018 Dr. A.P.S. Guru Praveen Versus Directorate of Medical Education Government of Tamilnadu Kilpauk, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-05-2018 Ultratech Cement Ltd. V/S CCG & ST, Udaipur - I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
18-05-2018 Shree Raipur Cement Plant Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Finance Department (Tax Division) High Court of Chhattisgarh
09-05-2018 Praveen Engineering Works V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Visakhapatnam - I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Hyderabad
24-04-2018 Praveen George Joseph & Another Versus Ramesh Joseph High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-04-2018 M/s. Current Advertising Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s. Cement Corporation of India Ltd. High Court of Delhi
10-04-2018 Praveen Pandey Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh
10-04-2018 Tamil Nadu Cement Corporation Ltd., Rep by its Deputy General Manager Versus Sun Industries, Rep. by its partner, K.T. Ramaraja & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2018 Brajabandhu Behera Versus Bargarh Cement Ltd. High Court of Orissa
15-03-2018 Praveen Versus Hanuman In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
09-03-2018 Praveen Versus The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
07-03-2018 Hasti Cement Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus Sandeep Charan & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
07-03-2018 Praveen Versus Deepa High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi
05-03-2018 Manglam Cement Ltd V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
26-02-2018 Ultratech Cement V/S CCE, Jaipur-I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
22-02-2018 Manikgarh Cement V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
19-02-2018 L.M.D. Athiya Praveen Versus N.B. Riyas Ahmed & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-02-2018 Praveen Maben Versus Nalini Maben High Court of Madhya Pradesh
15-02-2018 Abu Cement Ltd. and Others V/S CCE, Indore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi