Rajini Brian Castellino vs. Union Of India
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
Item No. 93 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 10871/2010 BARIPADA URBAN CO-OP BANK LTD & ANR. Appe llant(s) VERSUS BIMAL LOCHAN DAS & ORS. Resp ondent(s) Date : 19/09/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Anshu Malik,Adv. Mr. Rutwik Panda,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R What gets revealed from the perusal of the file is that neither the appellants nor the respondents have filed the statement of case, although they were notified to do so on 6.2.2012. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the appellant does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided for in sub rule (1), it shall be presumed that the appellant has adopted the list of dates/synopsis Signature Not Verified containing chronology of events as filed at the Digitally signed by time of presentation of petition for seeking special leave to Madhu Grover Date: 2014.09.20 11:36:07 IST Reason: appeal (SLP)/Appeal, as statement of case,and does not desire to file any further statement of case. The order further p rovides Item No. 93 2 that if the respondent who has entered appearance does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does not desire to
lodge the same. Therefore, in view of the rule position cited above no further opportunity for filing the statement of case is warranted to be given to the parties. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules.
(M K HANJURA) Registrar
MG