AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Court : The petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition as per the Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the
court. The petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.
The application arises out of an order dated April 28, 2020.
It appears that it was completely unnecessary to move the previous application on which the order dated April 28, 2020 was passed since a Larger
Bench of this Court had directed all subsisting interim orders to continue.
The interim order that was subsisting in favour of the applicant permitted the applicant, inter alia, to manufacture and sell its products till June 30, 2020.
In view of the Larger Bench omnibus order, the operation of the relevant orders stood extended.
However, since it was submitted on behalf of the applicant on April 28, 2020 that no manufacturing activity was being undertaken at that point of time,
the order of April 28, 2020 observed that such order would not be a charter for the applicant to continue to manufacture its products. To such extent,
such observation or direction in the order dated April 28, 2020 varied the subsisting order; but on the premise that manufacturing activity had been
suspended by the applicant.
It is now submitted on behalf of the applicant that the submission was erroneous and counsel did not obtain instructions from client before making the
submission. It is also submitted on behalf of the applicant that the manufacturing activity continued and still continues.
The present application is opposed primarily on the ground that against the parent order dated December 24, 2019 a Special Leave Petition has been
carried to the Supreme Court and such petition has been left defective.
Since it appears that the application on which the order dated April 28, 2020 was completely unnecessary, the order dated April 28, 2020 is recalled
and, in view of the Larger Bench order of this Court continuing all interim orders, the original order dated December 24, 2019 is deemed to continue till
expressly vacated.
In the light of the above, the subsequent objection as to the audio quality complained of on behalf of the appellant, is rendered irrelevant.
G.A. No. 3 of 2020 is disposed of without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, particularly of the appellant.
There will be no order as to costs.
A copy of this order will be available on the official website of this Court.