High CourtsSingle Bench

M/s. Park Sarvamangala Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Jharkhand & Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 17 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 JH CK 0184

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajesh Shankar, J
CASE NUMBER
Cont. Case (Civil) No.63 Of 2020

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 426 words

This case is taken up through video conferencing.

An adjournment slip has been filed by Mr. Sushawan Bhowmik, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6, stating inter alia that he has come in contact with a Covid-19 patient. Hence he has gone in isolation and due to the said reason he is not in position to appear in this case.

Mr. Vimal Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6 is seeking unnecessary adjournments in the matter on one pretext or the other. Earlier also on 25th March, 2021, the counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6 circulated an adjournment slip on the ground of medical urgency stating that he would not be in position to appear in the present case on 26th March, 2021. On the said date, the counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6, however, appeared and submitted that two supplementary show cause affidavits were filed; one on behalf of the opposite party no.4 (wrongly typed opposite party no.2 in the order dated 26th March, 2021) and another on behalf of the opposite party nos.5 and 6. Since those show cause affidavits were not available on record on the said date, the case was adjourned to be listed today. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite party nos.5 and 6 are adamant not to comply the order of this court and the conduct of their counsel is also not proper.

The aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is appreciated by this Court. However, keeping in view that the learned counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6 has mentioned in today's adjournment slip that he has come in contact with a Covid- 19 patient and hence has gone in home isolation, this Court refrains from passing any strict order against the opposite party nos.5 and 6. It is, however, observed that since at present the Court proceedings are being conducted through virtual mode, even if the counsel for the petitioner has gone in home isolation, he is not prevented from appearing before this Court through virtual mode from a particular place/room where he is in isolation.

Thus, the matter is adjourned to be listed on 30th April, 2021 under appropriate heading.

On the said date, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.4 to 6 shall ensure his presence through virtual mode, failing which this Court shall proceed in the matter on the basis of the documents available on record.