- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 29 January 2016
- Bench
- Joint Registrar (Judicial) Sh. Ashutosh Kumar (Dhjs)
- Case no.
- CS(OS) 2911/2014
Judgment
O R D E R %
29.01.2016 CS(OS) 2911/2014
Learned counsel for defendant no.1 has submitted that on
09.04.2015, his associate Mr. Kumar Kishlay, Adv. (Enrl. No.D233/2013) was instructed to appear on behalf of defendant no.1 only but due to communication gap, he wrongly informed the learned Predecessor that he is appearing on behalf of defendant no.1 to 3 and accordingly his presence was marked on behalf of said defendants. He has further submitted that he is not representing defendant no.2&3 and is yet to formally receive Vakalatnama on behalf of defendant no.1 in his favour.
Learned counsel for plaintiff has submitted that as per affidavit of service and track report, defendant no.2&3 were served for the date
18.02.2015. He also submitted that as per another affidavit of service and track report, defendant no.4 was served by speed post on 13.01.2015. In view of notification no.27187/DHC/Orgl. Dated 24.11.2015, the present matter stands transferred. Parties are directed to appear before the Court of Ld. District Judge, South East District, Saket Court Complex, Delhi on 13.07.2016 at 10.00 a.m.
ASHUTOSH KUMAR (DHJS)
JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL) JANUARY 29, 2016/ab
Case details
Parties and counsel
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2911/2014 ANIL BHATIA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Manik Jain, Adv. versus SURENDER BHATIA & OTHERS ..... Defendants Through Mr. Vikas Choubey, Adv. For D-1 None for D-2&3 CORAM: ASHUTOSH KUMAR (DHJS), JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.