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 · 201 wordsBP No. 587 of 2016
Learned counsel for petitioner and respondent no. 2 are present. Proceeding was ex-parte against respondent no. 1. But in utter precaution, a notice was also issued. Even then, none is for respondent no. 1. Hence, the proceeding will run ex-parte against respondent no. 1. Both sides are requesting for additional time for filing written arguments.
Let written arguments, after exchange in between, by both sides, be got filed with records of this Tribunal, positively within four weeks.
List the matter ‘for hearing’ on 27.2.2023.
BP No. 595 of 2016
Learned counsel for petitioner and respondent no. 2 are present. Proceeding was ex-parte against respondent no. 1. But in utter precaution, a notice was also issued. Even then, none is for respondent no. 1. Hence, the proceeding will run ex-parte against respondent no. 1. A time is being claimed for filing vakalatnama by counsel for respondent no. 2. Let vakalatnama be filed during course of the day. Both sides are requesting for additional time for filing written arguments.
Let written arguments, after exchange in between, by both sides, be got filed with records of this Tribunal, positively within four weeks.
List the matter ‘for hearing’ on 27.2.2023.