Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

SC to hear Ambani case again

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Ambani brothers
    The high-voltage legal battle between the Ambani brothers has entered its third week of hearing.

    The court battle between the Ambani brothers will begin afresh on Thursday, after two judges of the Supreme Court recused themselves from two separate cases on Wednesday, citing possible conflict of interest.

    Justice B Sudarshan Reddy has replaced Justice Raveendran. The three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan will start hearing the RIL-RNRL case afresh.

    Mukesh Ambani and Anil Ambani are battling over the delivery of gas from the Krishna Basin. Mukesh wants to revise the price of gas at which Anil can buy from him. The price agreed upon is below market rates, and was arrived at through a family agreement. When the case came up before the courts last month, Justice Raveendran told the court that he had shares in Mukesh Ambani's RIL and offered to withdraw from the case if anyone had any objection.

    "I came to know that my daughter is a partner in AZB Company. This company is advising RIL on global acquisitions. Though it is not directly connected with the case, I don't want to continue with the case," said Justice Raveendran.

    Ads by Google

    The high-voltage legal battle between the Ambani brothers has entered its third week of hearing.

    Justice Raveendran, one of the judges hearing the Ambani vs. Ambani case, dropped out of the case yesterday.

    After hearing the judgement for almost two months, Supreme Court Judge Markandey Katju dropped out of the case involving Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) on Wednesday.

    The case from which Justice Katju withdrew related to a dispute over the price of naphtha supplied by the state-owned Bharat Petroleum to Reliance Industries.

    ... contd.

    Next12
    Bad Taste To JudiciaryBy: madan Menon Thottasseri | 06-Nov-2009 Reply | Forward If a Judge had his own unique reasons to disassociate from the hearing a case, he should have opted out of the bench much earlier, not on the hearing day causing predicaments in all respects. The judge must have imagined that he sets an example, but went in bad taste as the incident will prolong the case and over-run cost and time to court and litigants. The nation needs Judges not only for good judgments but also for manifesting judicious precedents.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.