This review petition is filed inter alia contending that during the pendncy of the writ petition, the writ petition was amended and an additional prayer was incorporated, which was without notice to the petitioners. 2. It is not disputed that the petitioners were served with notice in the writ petition. They did not appear before this Court. The original relief sought for in the writ petition was for a direction to the Company Law Board to dispose of C.A. No. 84/2009 and C.A. No. 116/2010. During the pendency of the writ petition, it seems that C.A. No. 116/2010 was dismissed as per Ext. P4. The matter was placed before this Court by way of an amendment. This Court had directed the same to be reconsidered in accordance with law.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that pursuant to the directions issued, the company petition has already been disposed of, which is produced as Annexure I.
4. The petitioners were party to the proceedings pending before the Company Law Board and therefore the R.P. No. 678 of 2014 in W.P(C) No. 17911 of 2012 -: 2 :-
petitioners were entitled to take all contentions before the Company Law Board. Under such circumstances, when this Court had only set aside Ext. P4 and directed the Company Law Board to reconsider the company petition on merits, there is no reason to review the judgment. No grounds are made out warranting interference, hence this review petition is dismissed.
Tds/ Sd/-
A.M. Shaffique, Judge.