M/S METICULOUS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR MUNISH SINGH SALWAN v. PAWAN KUMAR MAINI
CR/4382/2025 · 2025-07-17
Vikas Bahl
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 79268 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 79268 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CR-4382-2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***
CR-4382-2025
Date of decision : 17.07.2025
M/s Meticulous Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.
... Petitioner
Versus
Pawan Kumar Maini
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Vishva Nath Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1.
This is a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Additional District Judge, Ambala in Civil Appeal titled as “M/s Meticulous Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s Grampus Pharmaceuticals” vide which the petitioner has been directed to pay ad-valorem court fee on the decretal amount.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a limited prayer before this Court to the extent that the petitioner would pay ad-valorem court fee on the amount ultimately decreed by the trial Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 but has prayed that six weeks time be granted to him to make the said payment. It is submitted that there is no interim order in Davinder Kumar 2025.07.18 16:16 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order /
judgment
CR-4382-2025
2
favour of the present petitioner in the appeal filed by it. It is further submitted that after 22.05.2025, the case was adjourned to 03.07.2025, on which date the petitioner had sought time for making payment and the case has been adjourned to 25.07.2025 for the purpose of making the payment.
3.
Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the limited prayer made by the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of while upholding the order dated 22.05.2025 by granting the petitioner six weeks time from today to deposit the ad-valorem court fee on the amount ultimately decreed by the trial Court.
4.
It would be open to the respondent to recall the present order in case, any statement made by the petitioner before this Court is found to be false/incorrect.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE July 17, 2025. Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned
Yes/No
Whether reportable
Yes/No Davinder Kumar 2025.07.18 16:16 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order /
judgment