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 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Kamalakant Sharma vs Union Of India . on 29 August, 2014

  ITEM NO.16                        REGISTRAR COURT. 2                 SECTION XIV

                              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 M K HANJURA

  Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                 No(s).   34354/2012

  KAMALAKANT SHARMA                                                 Petitioner(s)

                                               VERSUS

  UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                             Respondent(s)

  (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned
  judgment)


  WITH
  SLP(C) No. 32178/2012
  (With Interim Relief and Office Report)

  Date : 29/08/2014 These petitions were called on for hearing today.



  For Petitioner(s)                Mr. Piyush,Adv.
                                   Mr. G. S. Chatterjee ,Adv.


  For Respondent(s)                 Mr. B. K. Pal ,Adv.

                                   Ms. Shubhra Rai,Adv.
                                   Mr. Gopal Singh ,Adv.

                                   Mr. S.K. Pathak,Adv.
                                   Mr. P.N. Jha,Adv.



                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                            O R D E R
SLP(C) No. 34354/2012 Signature Not Verified

Service is complete in the matter and it has already directed Digitally signed by Madhu Grover to be listed before the Hon'ble Court vide this Court's Order Date: 2014.09.01 17:04:31 IST Reason:

dated 1.11.2013.
...2/-
Item No. 16 - 2 - SLP(C) No. 32178/2012
Respondent No.2 has already filed the counter affidavit as gets revealed from the perusal of the office report.
The office report states that although by Order dated 8.5.2014 six weeks time as last chance was given to the respondent No. 3 for filing the counter affidavit, yet he has not done the needful so far. Therefore no further opportunity is warranted to be given to him on that count taking into consideration the rule position. Service is complete as against 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 if and when the connected one gets ready for listing.
(M K HANJURA) Registrar MG