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
8 paragraphs · 194 wordsMs. Dilsheen Kaur, Advocate appearing for the petitioner in all the matters, states that rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner qua reply of R-2 in
B.P. No. 565/2020.   However, neither any reply nor even the vakalatnama on behalf of R-2 in the said petition is on record.  Mr. Ankur
Sharma states that he is appearing for R-2 in the said petition.   Liberty is given to Mr. Sharma to inspect the file and clarify as to whether he
has filed his reply alongwith vakalatnama in this matter or not.  For quick retrieval, he may provide the Diary No., so that Registry could locate the
reply and vakalatnama, if filed earlier, and place the same on record of the case.  Mr. Sharma, appearing for R-2 in all the matters, submits that
they do not intend to file the evidence affidavit.
One last opportunity is given to R-1 in B.P. No. 566 and 567/2017 to appear and file their evidence affidavit before the next date, failing which the
matters may be placed before Hon’ble Bench for passing appropriate orders.  List the matters on 5th May, 2021 for directions.