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

Delhi Development Authority vs Kashi Ram on 9 May, 2019

     ITEM NO.35                         REGISTRAR COURT. 1                 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 ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                  No(s).   20205/2018

     DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY                                        Petitioner(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     KASHI RAM & ORS.                                                   Respondent(s)


     Date : 09-05-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     For Petitioner(s)
                                       Ms. Garima Prashad, AOR

     For Respondent(s)
                                       Mr. Kunal Verma, AOR


                              UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                 O R D E R

None appeared for petitioner and respondent No.1 when called.

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.1 is still defective. Registry to process as per Order VIII Rule 6(3) and 6(4), Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

Service is complete on respondent Nos.2 to 4 but none has entered appearance.

Spare copy has not been filed in respect of respondent No.5. |The matter was listed before this Court on 29.4.2019, when the following order was passed - Signature Not Verified

“...Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is granted one Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Date: 2019.05.11 13:03:41 IST Reason: weeks time for filing spare copy in respect of respondent No.5 else action will be taken under Order V Rule 1(29).” Item No.35 -2- Vide order dated 29.4.2019, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner was directed to file spare copy within one week. He was cautioned that failure to file spare copy will attract action under Order V Rule 1(29), Supreme Court Rules, 2013. In spite thereof, spare copy has not been filed. Therefore, cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) is imposed in terms of Order V, Rule 1(29), Supreme Court Rules, 2013 which should be deposited with Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.

Since spare copy has not been filed, Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for orders.

ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar