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
7 paragraphs · 239 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent no. 2 in both the matters. Respondent no. 2 may file reply during course of the day, as prayed. Rejoinder, if required, may be filed within four weeks.
Earlier Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Advocate had appeared for respondent no. 1 in BP No. 183 of 2021 but for some reason he chose not to formally make appearance and today Mr. Sachin Aggarwal, advocate has appeared for the said respondent no.1. As prayed, he is granted two weeks' time for filing reply. Rejoinder, if required, may be filed by the next date.
In the last order passed on 9.4.2021, it was indicated that respondent no. 1 in BP No. 182 of 2021 was served with notice through various modes between 27.2.2021 and 10.3.2021 and that order for exparte hearing will be considered on the next date, if required.
Inspite of lapse of long period of time, nobody appears for the said respondent no. 1 even today. The prayer for exparte hearing against him is allowed.
Instead of reply, respondent no. 2 has filed an MA in BP No. 183 of 2021 seeking deletion. Petitioner may file a reply to the same within three weeks. If required, rejoinder may be filed by the next date. The matter shall be considered on the next date.
Post the matter under the same head on 10.11.2021.
Interim order shall continue till the next date.