Citicrop Finance (India) Limited vs Prime Telesystems Ltd. & Ors on 11 January, 2022

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Citicrop Finance (India) Limited vs Prime Telesystems Ltd. & Ors on 11 January, 2022

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                          $~14
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      EX.P. 5/2008 & EX.APPL.(OS) 1327/2021.
                                 CITICROP FINANCE (INDIA) LIMITED                    ..... Decree Holder
                                                    Through:     Mr. Anish Jaipuriar, Mr. Suraj Raj
                                                                 Kesherwani, Mr. Sonal Kumar Singh
                                                                 and Mr. Suhel Qureshi, Advocates.
                                                    versus

                               PRIME TELESYSTEMS LTD. & ORS.         ..... Judgment Debtors
                                              Through: Mr. Vibhor Kush, Advocate for
                                                       Judgment Debtors No. 1 & 2.
                               CORAM:
                               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                        ORDER

                          %             11.01.2022
                          [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

EX.APPL.(OS) 1327/2021 (u/ Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 [hereinafter "CPC"], seeking revival of the execution petition)

1. At the outset, Mr. Vibhor Kush, Advocate who appears on behalf of the Judgment Debtors No. 1 & 2 submits that an inadvertent mistake has been made in the Order dated 09th December, 2021 in so far as the appearance of Mr. Satish Mehta has been incorrectly recorded in para 5. He states that it has been wrongly recorded that notice was accepted by him on behalf of Judgment Debtor No. 2. Mr. Kush states that Mr. Satish Mehta is not an Advocate, and he did not appear before the Court on the said date.

2. Mr. Anish Jaipuriar, counsel for the Applicant/ Decree Holder, fairly states that as per his recollection, no one appeared on behalf of the Judgment Debtors.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AKANSHA SINGH Signing Date:12.01.2022 22:28:58

3. It is clarified that no one accepted notice on behalf of Judgment Debtor No. 2 in the above captioned application on the said date. The Order dated 09th December, 2021 stands corrected to the above effect.

4. Further, Mr. Kush states that he has recently been served with the copy of the order and notice of the afore-said application. He seeks time to comply with the directions contained therein.

5. In view of the foregoing circumstances, the affidavit as directed in para 8 of the Order dated 09th December, 2021, be filed within a period of three weeks from today. Reply to the afore-said application be filed within the above timelines. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of one week thereafter.

6. Re-notify on 25th February, 2022.

SANJEEV NARULA, J JANUARY 11, 2022 as Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AKANSHA SINGH Signing Date:12.01.2022 22:28:58

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders