TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Delhi High Court rectifies appearance records, directs parties to file affidavits. Interim order continues.</h1> The Delhi High Court corrected appearance records of counsels, rectifying errors in recording appearances for respondents. Parties were directed to file ... Copy of reply not placed on record - HELD THAT:- Mr. Ravi Prakash will ensure that the reply is placed on record. Furthermore, Ms. Venus Mehrotra, who appears on behalf of Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar, i.e., the counsel for respondent no. 2 and 8 says that a reply to the captioned application as well as a counter-affidavit to the main writ petition will be filed. In the previous order, i.e., order dated 17.03.2021, the appearance of Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar has been recorded, albeit incorrectly, for respondents no. 2 to 8. We are told that Ms. Bhatnagar appears on behalf of respondent no. 2 and 8. Furthermore, Mr. Ravi Prakash appears on behalf of respondent no. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9. The record shall stand corrected to that extent. List on 07.07.2021. Issues: Correction of appearance record, filing of counter-affidavits and replies, continuation of interim order, correction of typographical errors in the previous order, and fixing the next date of hearing.In this judgment by the Delhi High Court, the court corrected the appearance record of counsels representing different respondents. It was noted that there was an error in recording the appearance of Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar for respondents 2 and 8, and Mr. Ravi Prakash for respondents 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, which was rectified. The court directed the parties to file counter-affidavits and replies within the next four weeks, with any rejoinders to be filed before the next hearing. The interim order from a previous date was to continue in the meantime.Additionally, the court addressed typographical errors in a previous order and provided a corrected version of a paragraph for clarity. The court emphasized that no coercive measures would be taken against the petitioner at that time. The directions from the previous order, except for the corrected paragraph, were to remain unchanged. The court scheduled the next hearing for a specific date, listing the case for further proceedings on 07.07.2021.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
