AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
When the matter was first called out, Mr. N.C. Das, learned counsel for the Appellants appeared in virtual mode and prayed for an adjournment stating that today was the anniversary of the death of his elder brother. The Court did not accede to adjourn the matter but passed it over.
When the matter was called out after pass over, Mr. Das did not appear. Despite the matter being heard for some time and all other counsel including those appearing for the interveners and the Respondents making their submissions, Mr. Das did not appear either virtually or in the hybrid mode.
Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Appellants, could not have presumed that that his request for adjournment was being accommodated by the Court particularly, considering that a number of counsel are appearing on the side of the interveners and Respondents and the interim order against them is contnuing. Nevertheless, the Court considers it necessary to give one more chance to the Appellants, even while it finds no justification to continue theinterim order.
It is directed that the appeal be listed for hearing on 6th December, 2021 along with W.A. No.476 of 2020. It is made clear that no further adjournment will be granted.
I.A. No.178 of 2019
The interim order passed by this Court on 13th August, 2019 is hereby vacated. The application is dismissed..
.............................