Bombay High Court · 2025-12-23
YOGESH PRAKASH KELA vs HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION THROUGH PROTHONOTARY AND SENIOR MASTER
- Citation / case number
- APP/61/2026
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Petitioner
- YOGESH PRAKASH KELA
- Respondent
- HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION THROUGH PROTHONOTARY AND SENIOR MASTER
Judgment text excerpt
APPL-9967-2025-IN-CP-149-2012+-J.doc Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (L) NO. 9967 OF 2025 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 149 OF 2012 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 9970 OF 2025 1. YOGESH PRAKASH KELA 2. UMESH PRAKASH KELA 3. ABHILASHA KELA 4. LATA KELA 5. PRAKASH KELA 6. GOVINDA INDUSTRIES PVT LTD., All Respondent address is same, 102, Kakkad Enclave, 9th Road, …Appellants SHEPHALI Khar (West), Mumbai 400 052. (Org. Respondents) SANJAY MORMARE Digitally signed by SHEPHALI ~ versus ~ SANJAY MORMARE Date: 2025.12.23 19:08:16 +0530 1. HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION, through Prothonotary & Senior Master, High Court, Original Side, Bombay 2. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, …Respondents Bombay High Court (Org. Petitioner) A PPEARANCES For The Appellants Mr Girish Godbole, Senior Advocate, with Kunal Chheda, Kunal Mehta, Mohit Khanna & Mahesh Dube, i/b Kunal Chhheda Page 1 of 40 23rd December 2025 APPL-9967-2025-IN-CP-149-2012+-J.doc For Respondent No. 2. Mr Anirudh Hairani, with Palaksh Kanchan. Present in Court: 1. Mr Satyajit Roul, Official Liquidator 2. Mr Chetan Shelke, Deputy Official Liquidator. 3. Mr Yogesh Kela, Petitioner No. 1 4. Mr Umesh Kela, Petitioner No. 2 5. Ms Abhilasha Kela, Petitioner No. 3 6. Ms Lata Kela, Petitioner No. 4 7. Mr Prakash Kela, Petitioner No. 5 CORAM : SUMAN SHYAM & M. M. SATHAYE, JJ RESERVED ON : 25TH NOVEMBER 2025. PRONOUNCED ON : 23RD DECEMBER 2025. JUDGMENT (Per Suman Shyam, J):- 1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 18th March 2025 passed by the Learned Single Judge in Suo Moto Show Cause Notice No. 4 of 2019 in Official Liquidator’s Report No. 158 of 2019 in Company Application No. 708 of 2018 in Company Petition No. 149 of 2012, whereby the Appellants Nos. 1 to 5 h