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
14 paragraphs · 252 wordsWe have heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate assisted by Mr. Sameer Rastogi, Advocate and Mr. Manoj Mohanty, Representative for the
appellants and Mr. Pradeep Sancehti, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Mihir Mody and Mr. Shehaad Roshan, Advocates for the respondent through
video conference.
For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is allowed. The application seeking exemption
from filing the certified copy of the impugned order is disposed off with the direction that the certified copy shall be filed by the appellant on or before
the next date.
Four weeks time is allowed to the respondent to file reply. Two weeks thereafter to the appellants to file rejoinder. List on 6th November, 2020 for
admission and for final disposal.
Parties are directed to contact the Registrar 48 hours before the date fixed to find out as to whether the hearing would take place through video
conferencing or through physical hearing.
The present matter was heard through video conference due to Covid-19 pandemic. At this stage it is not possible to sign a copy of this order nor a
certified copy of this order could be issued by the registry. In these circumstances, this order will be digitally signed by the Presiding Officer on behalf
of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally signed copy of this order. Parties will act on production of a digitally signed
copy sent by fax and/or email.
