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
5 paragraphs · 200 wordsLearned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to file amended Memo of parties in B.P. Nos. 773,774 and 775 of 2020 during the course of the day, as prayed for.
Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that in B.P. Nos. 767 and 769 of 2020 he has not filed any formal application for deletion of respondent no. 2 but has strongly objected to his impleadment in the reply already filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for some more time to file rejoinder. As prayed, four weeks' further time is granted for filing rejoinder to reply of respondent no. 2 but by way of last opportunity. Suo moto this Tribunal may consider on the next date whether respondent no. 2 should be deleted or not in the light of facts of the case and various orders passed in other matters.
In the M.As. filed by the petitioner under Section 20 of the TRAI Act in B.P. Nos. 769, 773 and 774 of 2020, let notice be issued upon respondent no. 1, dasti and email in addition. Affidavit of service should be filed within four weeks in respect of the M.As.
Post the matter under the same head on 28.01.2022.