LISTED ON: 09.12.2014 BEFORE COURT NO. 2 ITEM NO. 35

SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO. 35967/2013

BAGHMAL (D) BY LRS. ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS

OFFICE REPORT

The matter above mentioned was listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar on 19.09.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order:-

"The office report indicates that the Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an application for substitution to bring on record the Lrs. of the deceased respondent Nos. 2 and 3 which is defective. The learned counsel shall cure the defects whatever have been found in the said application within a period of two weeks.

Three weeks time, as last chance is given to the learned counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for the service of notice to the unserved respondent No.7.

Mr. Pradeeep, Ld. Counsel has stated that he has already filed the vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No.4. Office shall verify the position and report accordingly. The learned counsel shall file the counter affidavit within a period of four weeks, in case he intends to do so.

What gets revealed from the perusal of the file is that although two opportunities have already been given to the respondent Nos. 1, 5 and 6 for filing the counter affidavit, yet they have not done the needful so far. Therefore no further opportunity is warranted to be given to them on that count taking into consideration the rule position.

List again on 8.12.2014."

It is submitted that Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, Advocate has filed vakalatnama/appearance on behalf of respondent No. 4 on 19.09.2014 but has not filed counter affidavit so far. Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 6 so far.

It is further submitted that counsel for the petitioner has not cured defects in application for substitution to bring on record Lrs. Of deceased respondent Nos. 2 and 3 which is barred by time by 400 and 2019 days respectively but counsel for the petitioner has not filed application for condonation of delay in filing substitution application and abatement if any so far, age of proposed Lrs is not mentioned fact that there are no Lrs apart from those mentioned in application have not been stated. Coy of application not served on counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 5 and 6.

It is lastly submitted that counsel for the petitioner has not taken fresh steps to serve respondent No. 7 so far.

The matter above-mentioned is listed before Hon'ble Court with this Office Report.

DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF December, 2014.

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

COPY TO:

Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv. Ch. No. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Adv. Ch. No. M/s. Saharya & Co., Adv. Ch. No. Mr. Farrukh Rasheed, Adv. Ch. No.

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

P-1