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
4 paragraphs · 260 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent-Andhra Pradesh State Fibernet Limited.
The earlier orders disclose that an exercise for reconciliation of accounts and settlement of related issues, if possible, has been initiated under orders of this Tribunal and the parties have participated in a meeting with Mr. Vedantam, CA on 19.3.2021. The next meeting scheduled on 11.8.2021 had to be rescheduled to 6.10.2021. The petitioners were present for the meeting at the relevant place but nobody could appear on behalf of the respondent. Mr. Tulsi Raj Gokul, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the non-appearance was not deliberate and for unavoidable reasons. It is not necessary at this stage to seek specific details of reasons and instead Mr. Vedantam who was present through video conferencing was requested to give another suitable date for the next meeting. This was done in view of an assurance and an undertaking on behalf of respondent that it shall participate in the next meeting. The date for the next meeting has been fixed for 6.11.2021. This Tribunal request/directs both the parties to participate in that meeting in the correct spirit as recorded in the earlier orders. For the convenience of the respondent so that they may be fully ready for the meeting, petitioners are given liberty to communicate a summary of the issues which are expected to be resolved.
Post the matter under the same head on 16.11.2021.
If the issues are resolved even partially, learned CA would be at liberty to submit a report to the Tribunal.
