AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J
I.A. No. 12 of 2024
This application for adjournment is misconceived. In paragraph 2 it is stated that when the matter came up on 01.03.2024 the date fixed was 14.03.2024 but however, later in the evening the learned counsel was informed that the date 14.03.2024 was rescheduled to 21.03.2024. In paragraph 3 the applicant states that due to prior commitments of the conducting counsel he will be out be out of town on 21.03.2024. If it was known to the learned counsel that the rescheduled date i.e. 21.03.2024 was not a date convenient to him he could have informed the registry at the very time, this information was communicated to him. If however, his going out of station was rescheduled only thereafter, the excuse in paragraph 2 has no relevance.
Thus, the application is rejected. However, it is seen that the learned counsel is not present in court today. He is being represented by Mr. Abhinav Kant Jha, learned counsel who is not on record as proxy counsel. Therefore, in the interest of justice the matter is adjourned to 07.05.2024.