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
4 paragraphs · 175 wordsLearned counsel for the respondent prayed for an adjournment with this mention that though a date on 2.8.2022 was taken by him to file vakalatnama, but it could not be filed. It is to be filed today itself. As files have been received today itself, hence, he is not ready to argue but on the next date he will certainly argue. This has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the petitioner. She specifically mentions that on previous date, time was taken for today and her client has moved from Kerala to the Court, hence, cost may be given to him to the tune of flight charges.
Hearing both sides and considering the contention of respondent, a token cost of Rs. 1000/- is being imposed on the respondent to be paid to the petitioner, which is to be paid within one week from today.
Hence, this matter is adjourned to 22.9.2022.
In the meantime, written arguments may be filed in the Tribunal and exchanged between the parties one week in advance from the next date.