Himachal Pradesh High Court
Himachal Air Products vs . Jyoti Batteries on 22 February, 2022
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
Himachal Air Products vs. Jyoti Batteries RFA No. 67 of 2000 .
22.02.2022 Present: Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate for the appellant.
As per report of the Registry, steps have not been taken for the service of respondents No. 4 to 8. Record demonstrates that these respondents were duly served at one stage and Mr. Y.Paul, Advocate had put in appearance on their behalf, however, it appears that subsequently as power of attorney was handed over by them in favour of learned Counsel, therefore, this Court directed for their fresh service.
Mr. Vivek Negi, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that as said respondents stood served and learned Counsel had also put in appearance on their behalf, then, the omission on the part of the served respondents of not handing over power of attorney in favour of learned Counsel cannot act to the deterrent of the appellant. He prays that it will be in the interest of justice in case the order vide which said respondents were ordered to be served afresh is recalled keeping in view the fact that these respondents were served and they be ordered to be proceeded against ex parte.
Having heard learned Counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the view that there is merit in what is being submitted by Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate. Once the respondents are served, then omission on their behalf of not handing over power of ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:01:23 :::CIS attorney in favour of learned Counsel, who had put in appearance .
on their behalf, on their instructions cannot now shift the burden on the appellant to serve them again. Accordingly, earlier order(s) whereby these respondents were ordered to be served again is recalled and they are ordered to proceeded against ex parte.
Being an appeal of the year 2000, list on its turn.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge February 22, 2022 (narender) ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:01:23 :::CIS