(N.V. Ramana, C.J. and A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.)
R.P.(C) Nos. 653-654/2021 in C.A. Nos. 440-441/2020, decided on February 15, 2022
Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. and Another _______________ Petitioner(s);
v.
Tata Consultancy Services Limited and Others _______ Respondent(s).
With
R.P.(C) Nos. 655-656/2021 in C.A. Nos. 13-14/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 657-658/2021 in C.A. Nos. 444-445/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 659-660/2021 in C.A. Nos. 19-20/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 661-662/2021 in C.A. Nos. 442-443/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 663-664/2021 in C.A. Nos. 448-449/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 665-666/2021 in C.A. Nos. 263-264/2020 & R.P.(C) No. 667/2021 in C.A. No. 1802/2020
R.P.(C) Nos. 653-654/2021; C.A. Nos. 440-441/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 655-656/2021; C.A. Nos. 13-14/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 657-658/2021; C.A. Nos. 444-445/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 659-660/2021; C.A. Nos. 19-20/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 661-662/2021; C.A. Nos. 442-443/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 663-664/2021; C.A. Nos. 448-449/2020; R.P.(C) Nos. 665-666/2021; C.A. Nos. 263-264/2020; R.P.(C) No. 667/2021; and C.A. No. 1802/2020
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Applications seeking exemption from filing affidavits are allowed.
2. Applications seeking oral hearing of the Review Petitions are allowed.
3. List the Review Petitions on Wednesday, the 9th March, 2022.
R.P.(C) Nos. 653-654/2021 in C.A. Nos. 440-441/2020
Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. & Anr ___________________ Petitioner(s)
v.
Tata Consultancy Services Limited & Ors ___________ Respondent(s)
WITH
R.P.(C) Nos. 655-656/2021 in C.A. Nos. 13-14/2020, R.P. (C) Nos. 657-658/2021 in C.A. Nos. 444-445/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 659-660/2021 in C.A Nos. 19-20/2020, R.P. (C) Nos. 661-662/2021 in C.A. Nos. 442-443/2020, R.P. (C) Nos. 663-664/2021 in C.A. Nos. 448-449/2020, R.P.(C) Nos. 665-666/2021 in C.A. Nos. 263-264/2020 & R.P. (C) No. 667/2021 n C.A. No. 1802/2020
ORDER
4. With utmost respect, I regret my inability to agree with the order. I have carefully gone through the Review Petitions and I do not find any valid ground to review the judgment. The grounds raised in the Review Petitions do not fall within the parameters of a review and hence the applications seeking oral hearing deserve to be dismissed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
R.P.(C) Nos. 653-654/2021 in C.A. Nos. 440-441/2020
Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.….Petitioner(s)
v.
Tata Consultancy Services Limited & Ors.….Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No. 57761/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT)
WITH
R.P.(C) Nos. 655-656/2021 in C.A. Nos. 13-14/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68199/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68201/2021)
R.P.(C) Nos. 657-658/2021 in C.A. Nos. 444-445/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68276/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68278/2021)
R.P.(C) Nos. 659-660/2021 in C.A. Nos. 19-20/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68205/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68207/2021)
R.P.(C) Nos. 661-662/2021 in C.A. Nos. 442-443/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68215/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68217/2021)
R.P.(C) Nos. 663-664/2021 in C.A. Nos. 448-449/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68249/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68254/2021)
R.P.(C) Nos. 665-666/2021 in C.A. Nos. 263-264/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68226/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68227/2021)
R.P.(C) No. 667/2021 in C.A. No. 1802/2020 (XVII)
(FOR ORAL HEARING ON IA 68275/2021 & FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT ON IA 68277/2021)
Date : 15-02-2022 These matters were circulated today.
(Before N.V. Ramana, C.J. and A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.)
By Circulation
UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
ORDER
Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India & Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna
5. Applications seeking exemption from filing affidavits are allowed.
6. Applications seeking oral hearing of the Review Petitions are allowed.
7. List the Review Petitions on Wednesday, the 9th March, 2022.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian
8. With utmost respect, I regret my inability to agree with the order. I have carefully gone through the Review Petitions and I do not find any valid ground to review the judgment. The grounds raised in the Review Petitions do not fall within the parameters of a review and hence the applications seeking oral hearing deserve to be dismissed.
———
