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 · 221 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner/Judgment Debtor.
Today Mr. Nittin Bhatia, Advocate who was earlier appearing for the Judgment Debtor no. 1 has appeared. He apologises for not appearing on the last date and explained that it was because of some mis-communication with his client that he chose not to appear. He seeks discharge as a counsel for the Judgment Debtor. The prayer is allowed.
Already Judgment Debtor has failed to show compliance by not filing the required affidavits and documents within time granted.
One Mr. Debashis Mukherjee, Advocate briefly appeared online but left the proceedings without making any submissions. The conduct of respondent needs to be examined for the purpose of action under Section 20 of the TRAI Act initiated suo-moto by the last order.
The office is once again directed to issue notice by all possible means including email and telephonic message of the next date when final order shall be passed.
It will be open for the Judgment Debtor to file a show-cause in the meantime.
Petitioner was required to furnish the details of Police Station and the authority who may be directed to execute warrant for custody of Judgment Debtor. As prayed on behalf of the petitioner, the necessary details may be furnished within 10 days from today.
Post the matter under the same head on 16.3.2022.