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

The State Of Rajasthan vs Vedanta Limited Formerly Known As Cairn ... on 10 August, 2021

     ITEM NO.4                       REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE
     SECTION XV

                                   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. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL

                                         Civil Appeal   No(s).   2015/2020

     THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.                                       Appellant(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     VEDANTA LIMITED FORMERLY KNOWN AS CAIRN INDIA LIMITED & ORS.
                                                      Respondent(s)



     Date : 10-08-2021 This appeal was called on for hearing today.



     For Appellant(s)
                                        Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR


     For Respondent(s)
                                        Mr. Rajat Mittal, AOR
                                        Mr. Ashish Rana, AOR


               UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the
     Court made the following
                                  O R D E R

Respondent no.1 has already filed counter affidavit. Await certificate of service in respect of respondent no.3. Issue D.O. letter.

Ld. counsel for respondent no.4 has requested for copy of pleadings. Ld. counsel for the appellant to provide copy of pleadings to the ld. counsel for respondent no.4 within one Signature Not Verified weeks time and file proof thereof. Ld. counsel for respondent Digitally signed by Indu Marwah Date: 2021.08.14 12:35:18 IST Reason: no.4 to file counter affidavit within four weeks thereafter. -2- Item No.4 Ld. counsel for respondent no.1 has pointed out that respondent no.2 was the Director of respondent no.1-Company ten years ago and he has already retired. He has made a request that the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents may be treated for respondent no.1 only and not on behalf of respondent no.2 as he has no authority to file vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.2. He further pointed out that respondent no.2 is not a contesting respondent.

The service status of respondent no.2 is not clear though it has been reported that respondent no.2 is served. Registry to verify. Petitioner is free to take a call whether respondent no.2 is to be deleted or not.

List again on 22.9.2021.

RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar