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 · 277 wordsIt was submitted by the Learned Counsel Mr. Ankur Sharma that he has instructions for withdrawal of his Vakalatnama in B.P.Nos.399 and 405 of 2019 on behalf of Respondent No.1. The statement of Mr. Ankur Sharma is taken on record. It was further submitted that the proprietor of Respondent No.1 firm in B.P.No.407 of 2019 has died and he has also produced Death Certificate of one Mr. Makhanlal Saini. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks time for seeking instructions in B.P.No.407 of 2019. It was further submitted on behalf of Respondent No.1 that they shall be filing Evidence Affidavits in B.P.Nos.401, 402 and 406 of 2019 during the course of the day. The time as prayed by Respondent No.1 for filing the Evidence Affidavits in B.P.Nos.401, 402 and 406 of 2019 is allowed. Two weeks time is granted to the Petitioner for seeking instructions regarding the death of Respondent No.1 in B.P.No.407 of 2019 as prayed. Respondent No.1 in B.P.Nos.399 and 405 of 2019 is granted two weeks time for filing fresh Vakalatnama.
It was also submitted by Mr. Ankur Sharma on behalf of Respondent No.2 that he has been informed by the Learned Counsel that they shall not be filing their Evidence Affidavits on behalf of Respondent No.2 in any of the matters rather Miscellaneous Applications are likely to be filed for deletion of Respondent No.2, competing MSOs from the array of the party.
Respondent No.2 to file appropriate Miscellaneous Applications, if so advised. Let the matter be listed on 31st May, 2022 for directions. Let a copy of this Order be sent to Respondent No.1 in B.P.Nos.399 and 405 of 2019 through e-mail.
