T.N.RAGHUPATHY Vs. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA and ORS. .
EmailAppeal: CIVIL APPEAL NO.11439 OF 2014
Petitioner: T.N.RAGHUPATHY
Respondent: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA and ORS. .
Judges: ANIL R. DAVE , KURIAN JOSEPH
Date of Judgment: Mar 26, 2015
JUDGEMENT:
NON- CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2 OF 2014 (For correction/modification of appearance in Order dated 08.12.2014 and Judgment dated 16.12.2014
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.11439 OF 2014
T.N.RAGHUPATHY … APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Mr. Vikas Mehta, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant-Respondent No.4 has submitted that Shri Aditya Sondhi, learned senior counsel, had in fact not appeared in the matter and yet his name has been recorded in the order as well as appearance shown in the proceedings. He has further submitted that the name of the learned counsel has been recorded because a mistake had been committed in the appearance slip submitted by the learned Advocate-on-Record on 8th and 16th December, 2014. Though Shri Aditya Sondhi had not appeared, his name had been stated in the appearance slip and therefore, his name is recorded in the Judgment as well as in the appearance.
So as to support his submission, an affidavit has been filed by the learned counsel. In view of the above fact and on the basis of the affidavit filed by the learned counsel, the payer made in the application is granted and it is ordered that name of Shri Aditya Sondhi, learned senior counsel be deleted from the proceedings dated 8th December, 2014 as well as from the Judgment dated 16th December, 2014 in Civil Appeal No.11439/2014.
…………..J. [ANIL R. DAVE]
…………..J. [KURIAN JOSEPH] New Delhi; 26th March, 2015.
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.2 OF 2014 (For correction/modification of appearance in Order dated 08.12.2014 and Judgment dated 16.12.2014
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.11439 OF 2014
T.N.RAGHUPATHY … APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Mr. Vikas Mehta, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant-Respondent No.4 has submitted that Shri Aditya Sondhi, learned senior counsel, had in fact not appeared in the matter and yet his name has been recorded in the order as well as appearance shown in the proceedings. He has further submitted that the name of the learned counsel has been recorded because a mistake had been committed in the appearance slip submitted by the learned Advocate-on-Record on 8th and 16th December, 2014. Though Shri Aditya Sondhi had not appeared, his name had been stated in the appearance slip and therefore, his name is recorded in the Judgment as well as in the appearance.
So as to support his submission, an affidavit has been filed by the learned counsel. In view of the above fact and on the basis of the affidavit filed by the learned counsel, the payer made in the application is granted and it is ordered that name of Shri Aditya Sondhi, learned senior counsel be deleted from the proceedings dated 8th December, 2014 as well as from the Judgment dated 16th December, 2014 in Civil Appeal No.11439/2014.
…………..J. [ANIL R. DAVE]
…………..J. [KURIAN JOSEPH] New Delhi; 26th March, 2015.
