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
3 paragraphs · 250 wordsThe appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution on 1st December, 2020 for want of instructions to the then counsel for the appellant. Now a restoration application has been filed and the counsel contends that there was a communication gap between the appellant and their previous counsel which led to the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. Considering the aforesaid, though the grounds mentioned does not appear to be bonafide, however, in the larger interest we allow the application on payment of cost of Rs.20,000 per appellant to be paid by means of a demand draft before the Registrar of the Tribunal within two weeks from today. The application is allowed. The appeal is restored to its original number. List for admission of 15th April, 2021.
Parties are directed to contact the Registrar 48 hours before the date fixed to find out as to whether the hearing would take place through video conferencing or through physical hearing.
The present matter was heard through video conference due to Covid-19 pandemic. At this stage it is not possible to sign a copy of this order nor a certified copy of this order could be issued by the registry. In these circumstances, this order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally signed copy of this order. Parties will act on production of a digitally signed copy sent by fax and/or email.
