AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 113 wordsSanjay Kumar, CJ
In the light of the affidavit filed by the petitioner, the Registry may note of the fact that deceased respondent No. 1 is represented by respondent No. 2, her son, and there is no necessity to implead any other LR.
Necessary corrections may be carried out by the Registry in the cause title of the CRPs.
Mr. Tomclist H., learned counsel, represents Mr. M. Devananda, learned counsel for the respondents, and Ms. N. Savitri, learned counsel, represents Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Both of them seek an adjournment.
Post on 21-09-2022.
Earlier interim order in CRP(C.R.P. Art.227) No. 68 of 2019 shall stand extended till then.