Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Chairman And M.D. Mtnl vs Reliance Infocom Ltd. on 22 August, 2017

     Item No. 44                                           1

                              REGISTRAR COURT. 2                SECTION XVII

                              S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


                             BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR



     Civil Appeal            No(s).   2513/2007


     CHAIRMAN AND M.D. MTNL                                         Appellant(s)

                                                  VERSUS
     RELIANCE INFOCOM LTD. & ANR.                                   Respondent(s)


     WITH
     C.A. No. 2906/2007 (XVII)

     Date : 22-08-2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today.


     For Appellant(s)             Mr. Chandan Kumar,Adv.
                                  Ms. Madhu Sikri, AOR

     For Respondent(s)            Mr. Prashant Briz Brawa,Adv.
                                  Mr. Akshit Gadhou,Adv.
                                  Mr. Munawwar Naseem, AOR

                                   Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR

                                  Mr. Rohit Kaul,Adv.
                                  Mr. Abhijat P. Medh, AOR


                                   Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR



                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                            O R D E R
C.A. No. 2513/2007 Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MADHU GROVER

Date: 2017.08.23 File not received.

16:15:43 IST Reason: Item No. 44 2 C.A. No. 2906/2007

Impleaded respondent No.2 has failed to file the counter affidavit within the period stipulated under the rules, whereas Counsel has submitted that he has already filed an application giving details of the subsequent facts. On this background, he states that he does not need to file the counter affidavit. This is taken on record. Service of notice is complete on the respondent No.1 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Viewed, in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court, under the rules.

SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar MG