Certificate of service, counter affidavit, court fee compliance, and procedural steps discussed in recent judgment.

The judgment addressed the need for a certificate of service for multiple respondents in different cases, awaiting the certificate from the High Court. It also noted the denial of an opportunity to file a counter affidavit for the sole respondent in one case. Non-payment of Ad-valorem court fee was highlighted, with concerns raised over non-compliance by the appellant's counsel. Instructions were given to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers. Additionally, cases involving completed service with no appearance, compliance with filing requirements, and granting time for affidavit and court fee submission were discussed, emphasizing procedural steps and deadlines.

---

---

Issues:
1. Certificate of service for multiple respondents in various cases.
2. Opportunity to file a counter affidavit.
3. Non-payment of Ad-valorem court fee.
4. Processing for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers.
5. Service on the sole respondent with no appearance.
6. Filing of affidavit of valuation and court fee.
7. Granting time to file affidavit and deficit court fee.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the need for a certificate of service for multiple respondents in different cases. It specifically mentions awaiting the certificate of service for various respondents from the High Court in different Civil Appeals.

2. In one case, the opportunity to file a counter affidavit has been declined for the sole respondent, indicating a procedural step where the chance to respond has been missed.

3. The issue of non-payment of Ad-valorem court fee is highlighted, with the counsel for the appellant failing to submit it despite the last opportunity given. This non-compliance is noted as a concern.

4. The registry is instructed to process the matter as per rules for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers, indicating a procedural step for further legal actions and orders.

5. In another case, service on the sole respondent has been completed, but no appearance has been made so far, indicating a lack of response from the concerned party.

6. The judgment mentions the filing of an affidavit of valuation and Ad valorem court fee by the counsel for the appellant in a specific case, showing compliance with the required documentation.

7. In a different case, the sole respondent is duly represented, and the counsel for the appellant is granted four weeks' time to file the affidavit of valuation and deficit court fee, with a specific date for listing the case again provided. This showcases a procedural timeline for the submission of necessary documents and fees.

---