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 · 264 wordsAhanthem Bimol Singh, J
Mr. N. Zequeson, leaned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that he is ready to advance argument.
Mr. H. Debendra, learned senior counsel and Deputy AG, Manipur assisted by Ms. Sharmila, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3, Ms. Gunapriya, learned counsel representing the Advocate on record appeared on behalf of the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7, Ms. Aribam Tapashori, learned counsel representing the Advocate on record appeared on behalf of respondent No. 8 and Mr. S. Vijayanand Sharma, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent No. 9. None appeared on behalf of respondent No. 4, despite service of notice.
The counsel representing the respondents No. 5, 6, 7 and 8 seeks adjournment of hearing of these cases citing personal inconvenience on the part of the conducting counsel.
This prayer is vehemently objected to by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on the ground that on several occasions, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 have been seeking adjournment time and again. As the adjournment has been sought for on ground of personal inconvenience, one last chance is given to the counsel appearing for the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7.
As prayed for, list these cases again on 13-05-2026 for further hearing. It is made clear that in the event, the Advocate on record on behalf of the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 is not available, an alternative arrangement be made to represent the said respondents and the matter will be heard on merit on that day.