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]

National Green Tribunal

Mr Subhash Kalyanji Tanna vs Echjay Industries Pvt Ltd on 21 March, 2023

Item No. 8                                                    (Pune Bench)

                BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
                    WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE

                         (By Video Conferencing)

                   Original Application No. 90/2022(WZ)


Subhash K. Tanna
                                                                   .....Applicant
                                    Versus

Echjay Industries Pvt Ltd. &Ors.
                                                              ....Respondent(s)
Date of hearing:   21.03.2023

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
       HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER

Applicant          :     Mr. Harshad Garud, Advocate
Respondent(s)      :     Mrs. Sunita Kinkar, Advocate for R-1/PP
                         Ms. Manasi Joshi, Advocate for R-4/MPCB


                                   ORDER

1. From the side of Applicant, learned Counsel Mr. Harshad Garud has appeared and states that the Joint Committee Report is in his favour.

2. From the side of Respondent No. 1/Project Proponent, learned Counsel Mrs. Sunita Kinkar has appeared and states that in Joint Committee Report with respect to the allegation at sr. no. 1, it is observed by the Joint Committee that evidence has not been extended from the side of Respondent No. 1/Project Proponent with regard to the valid bills as it is being claimed by the Respondent No. 1 that the water for the unit was being purchased and that, no extraction of water from the bore wells was being done at their end. For providing the said evidence, two weeks' time is prayed to be allowed, we allow the same as requested. Page 1 of 2

3. The learned Counsel for the Applicant also seeks two weeks' time to file rejoinder affidavit against the reply affidavit of Respondent No. 1/Project Proponent and the same is allowed.

4. From the side of Respondent No. 4/MPCB, learned Counsel Ms. Manasi Joshi has appeared and states that no reply affidavit is to be filed from their end as they are relying upon the Joint Committee Report.

5. As per the service affidavit, notice of service is sufficient upon all the Respondents.

6. None-else has appeared today.

7. We direct the Registry to place this matter for final hearing on 11.05.2023.

8. Parties shall have exchanged the pleadings among themselves so that no adjournment would be required on the next date.

9. Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM March 21, 2023 Original Application No. 90/2022(WZ) P.Kr Page 2 of 2