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
15 paragraphs · 293 wordsThe matter has been listed today during the pandemic and the hearing is being done through video conferencing because Hon’ble Bombay High
Court was approached by respondent against an interim order passed by this Tribunal, the order of the High Court makes a request for early hearing
of this Appeal and therefore the respondent has filed M A No. 117 of 2021 with a simple prayer to fix a date for early hearing of the Appeal.
The respondent has already filed its reply on 28.5.2021. Earlier this Tribunal had granted two weeks’ time to the appellant to file a
rejoinder. Hence, let now a rejoinder be filed within two weeks from today.
Presently as per calendar the summer vacation for the Tribunal will end on Friday, the 2nd July, 2021.
Considering all the constraints, it is not found feasible to hear the matter before 15th June, 2021 although the same is indicated in the request by
Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
On behalf of respondent, Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, learned senior counsel argued for passing some further interim orders which according to him would
serve the interest of justice. But it is not possible to accept such oral prayer more so when the interim order passed earlier was after hearing both
the parties at quite some length.
Mr. Gopal Jain, learned senior counsel for the appellant also opposed grant of any interim relief to the respondent in absence of any such prayer in
the MA. Hence the interim order passed earlier is not altered.
Other issues or concerns shall be considered at the time of final hearing. The MA under consideration is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
List the matter under the head “For Hearing†on 13.7.2021.
