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
5 paragraphs · 154 wordsB. Bhattacharjee, J
Mr. D. Thabah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that although Mr. P. Nongbri, learned counsel, has appeared and argued on behalf of the petitioners, there is no authorization from the petitioners allowing him to do so. He referred to the vakalatnama appended to the petition to show that Mr. P. Nongbri has not signed the same.
Mr. P. Nongbri, on the other hand, submitted that he has been duly authorized by the petitioners to appear and argue the case, but, due to an oversight, his signature was not obtained on the vakalatnama at the time when the matter was filed. He, however, submitted that he is ready to obtain a fresh vakalatnama from the petitioners to support his authorization in this case.
In view of the above, the matter stands adjourned to enable Mr. P. Nongbri to obtain proper authorization.
List this matter after 1 (one) week.