Supreme Court - Daily Orders
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Sonigra Juhi Uttamchand on 9 April, 2021
ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE
SECTION XII
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 SH. RAJIV KALRA
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 30491/2018
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SONIGRA JUHI UTTAMCHAND Respondent(s)
(Only SLP(C) 30491 and 33052 of 2018 and SC 12272 of 2019 are
listed before Ld. Registrar court )
WITH
SLP(C) No. 33052/2018 (XII)
(FOR ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES ON IA 114476/2019)
SLP(C) No. 12272/2019 (XII)
(IA No.70951/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA
No.70953/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
and IA No.70952/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING)
Date : 09-04-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.
For Parties Mr. Viresh B. Saharya, AOR
Mr.K.V.JAGDISHVARAN, ADV.
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the
Court made the following
O R D E R
SLP(C) No.30491/2018
Respondent No.1 has failed to file counter affidavit even after availing effective opportunity.
Signature Not VerifiedIn terms of Hon’ble Judge-in-Chambers’ Order dated 30.09.2019, Digitally signed by RASHI GUPTA the name of Respondent No.2 has already been deleted from the array Date: 2021.04.10 11:02:51 IST Reason:
of parties and in terms of Hon’ble Judge-in-Chambers’ Order dated 03.02.2020, matter already stood dismissed qua Respondent Nos.3 & 4 for non-compliance.
Registry to process the matter for listing before Hon’ble Court as per rules.
SLP(C) No.33052/2018Name of Respondent No.2 has already been deleted from the array of parties.
Four weeks’ time, as a last chance, is granted to Respondent No.1 to file counter affidavit. After expiry of four weeks’ time, Registry to process the matter for listing before Hon’ble Court as per rules.
SLP(C) No. 12272/2019Despite due service no one appeared for Respondent no.2. At this stage, Mr. Viresh B. Saharya, learned AOR while appearing for Respondent No.2 seeks and granted four weeks’ time to file Vakalatnama and counter affidavit.
Notice issued to Respondent No.1 by post received back with remarks "Refused". Refusal by post constitutes deemed service. But no one appeared for the said respondent.
Notice issued to Respondent Nos.3 & 4 received undelivered with remarks "Addressee Moved" and “Insufficient Address” respectively. Two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) to take fresh steps and to file fresh particulars for effecting service upon said unserved respondents.
List the matter again on 07.07.2021.
RAJIV KALRA Registrar (RG) (2)