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 · 218 wordsThe E.A is admitted for hearing. It appears that advance copy of the EA has been served not only on the parties but also to Ms. Sneha Ravi Iyer, Advocate. The stand of the learned counsel for respondent no. 1 Ms Shubhika Saluja, Advocate representing Ms. Sneha Ravi Iyer is that respondent no. 1 has stopped giving instrcutions long back even in BP No. 516 of 2020 and therefore, she is not in a position to represent respondent no. 1 in this Execution Application.
The aforesaid fact is noted. Let the name of learned counsel Ms. Sneha Ravi Iyer be deleted from the cause list.
Issue notice to both the respondents. Rule is made returnable within four weeks.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner / applicant has pressed M.A. No. 340 of 2021 wherein a prayer has been made to add Mr. Sachin Narayan as respondent no. 3 for the various reasons indicated in the M.A. Issue notice to Mr. Sachin Narayan also at the address given in the amended memo of parties filed alongwith the M.A. Rule is made returnable within four weeks in the M.A also.
Parties will be entitled to file reply by the next date to the execution application as well as to the M.A.
Post the matter under the head 'for directions' on 4.1.2022.