time
till 12:00 PM. Subsequently, when counsel for the accused sought passovers,
the Court imposed a cost of Rs.1,000/- and later increased ... physi-
cally present in court but in reality he is not, passover is given to them till 12.00 PM to produce the com-
plainant
been accepted today by the accused persons
in the court itself.
Today, Passover has repeatedly been sought for on the ground that ld.
Main counsel ... been accepted today by the accused persons
in the court itself.
Today, Passover has repeatedly been sought for on the ground that ld.
Main counsel
accused was busy in Hon'ble Supreme Court and a passover was
sought but the learned Trial Court imposed heavy cost of
Rs.5000 ... passover the matter for post-lunch session.
Ld. counsel has further argued that an application for waiver of
cost was moved on 24.05.2025. The matter
Present: Ld Counsel for aggrieved alongwith aggrieved.
Respondent no.1 in person.
Passover sought buy respondent no.1 on the ground that his
counsel will ... Court of Delhi.
It is noted in the last order that no passover or adjournment
shall be granted, yet in the interest of justice
Rakesh vs Bharti on 23 May, 2012
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
counsel had appeared before the learned trial
court and requested for a Passover. However, the learned Trial Court instead
of granting a Passover, closed ... petitioner was not seeking an adjournment but was
only requesting a Passover, ironically, the learned Trial Court closed the
defendant‟s evidence in haste
2023 Page 1 of 5
Signing Date:09.05.2023
20:43:22
passover till 03.00 PM on the ground that the arguing counsel was
held ... Supreme Court. Passover was strongly objected to by
counsel for the Plaintiff.
7. Trial Court by the impugned order declined to passover the
matter
petitioners is not present.
On his behalf any request for passover or adjournment is also not made.
No one has attended the hearing on behalf ... attended the
hearing until 11.35 a.m. and any request for passover or adjournment is also not
made on behalf of the petitioners, the Court
that on 16.01.2019 when the matter was called, he
requested for a passover in order to bring the cost but the learned Rent
Controller proceeded ... other hand, learned counsel for respondents
emphatically stated that no passover was sought on 16.01.2019 on behalf
of the present appellants and plea to that
absurd to order the petitioner / accused to
appear at recall after passover as he had already informed on
VC that he was in Patial House ... main counsel
but directed the main counsel to appear after passover,
assuming without any basis that the main counsel could do so
but was avoiding
