Pawan Gupta Anr vs Miton Credentia Trusteeship Services ...

ik-4361712 Delhi High Court 27 December 2024 • 10 min read

Judges (1)

Counsel (5)

Arvind Nayar Counsel Plaintiff Divya Narayanan Counsel Plaintiff Himanshu Satija Counsel Plaintiff Jai Sahai Endlaw Counsel Plaintiff Karan Khanna Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (13)

Aakash Nirman Udyog Private Limited Defendant Connecor Investment Enterprises Limited Defendant LGOF Global Opportunities Limited Defendant Magnificient Overseas Private Limited Defendant Manglam Developers Private Limited Defendant Miton Credentia Trusteeship Services Limited Defendant P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Defendant Kamal Gupta Defendant Mohit Gupta Defendant Mukesh Gupta Defendant Pawan Gupta Plaintiff Renu Gupta Plaintiff Veena Gupta Defendant

Case Significance

Pawan Gupta Anr vs Miton Credentia Trusteeship Services ... is a Delhi High Court decision dated December 27, 2024 (citation: ik-4361712). The plaintiffs filed a commercial suit seeking interim injunction in a family property dispute involving multiple companies and a Family Settlement, with certain properties also subject to trustee and foreign fund claims. The Court declined to grant ad interim injunction, noting the Section 12A pre-litigation mediation application was pending, there was no immediate urgency, and questions of maintainability vis-à-vis NCLT jurisdiction under the Companies Act had been raised. The Court observe The case was heard by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna. Counsel appearing: Arvind Nayar (counsel for plaintiff), Divya Narayanan (counsel for plaintiff), Himanshu Satija (counsel for plaintiff), Jai Sahai Endlaw (counsel for plaintiff), Karan Khanna (counsel for plaintiff).

Summary

The plaintiffs filed a commercial suit seeking interim injunction in a family property dispute involving multiple companies and a Family Settlement, with certain properties also subject to trustee and foreign fund claims. The Court declined to grant ad interim injunction, noting the Section 12A pre-litigation mediation application was pending, there was no immediate urgency, and questions of maintainability vis-à-vis NCLT jurisdiction under the Companies Act had been raised. The Court observed that the remedy under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act could be availed even against non-parties to the Family Settlement.

What was the outcome of Pawan Gupta Anr vs Miton Credentia Trusteeship Services ...?

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-4361712)