Court Grants Extension for Respondent's Counsel, Adjusts Hearing Schedule The Court accommodated the Respondent's request for additional time to prepare arguments by rescheduling the hearing to allow their counsel to present ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court Grants Extension for Respondent's Counsel, Adjusts Hearing Schedule
The Court accommodated the Respondent's request for additional time to prepare arguments by rescheduling the hearing to allow their counsel to present effectively. The Court also adjusted the hearing schedule to accommodate the unavailability of the Respondent's counsel due to prior commitments. The matter was directed to be listed for further proceedings on a specified date, with orders for timely communication of the directives to the parties for compliance.
Issues: 1. Prayer for interim relief 2. Availability of Respondent's counsel 3. Application before the Special Judge by SFIO
Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to a case where the Court heard submissions from both parties regarding the prayer for interim relief. The Petitioner was represented by learned Senior Counsel Mr. Kapil Sibal, while the Respondents were represented by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, Ms. Maninder Acharya. The Respondent sought time for reply arguments, and the Court accommodated this request by fixing a special hearing time the next day to allow Ms. Acharya to present her arguments effectively.
2. The Respondent's counsel, Ms. Acharya, informed the Court that she would not be available the next day at the originally scheduled time due to prior commitments in other urgent matters. As a result, the Court adjusted the hearing schedule to ensure that Ms. Acharya could present her arguments by fixing a special time slot for the hearing. Additionally, Ms. Acharya confirmed that the Respondents would not press an application listed before the Special Judge, where permission was sought by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) to record the statement of the Petitioner.
3. The Court, after considering the submissions and scheduling adjustments, directed the matter to be listed on 24th August 2018 for further proceedings. Furthermore, the Court ordered that a copy of the order be provided urgently to the parties under the signatures of the Court Master to ensure timely communication and compliance with the directives issued during the hearing.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.