Gian Chand Jain& Anr. vs. State Of Haryana And Ors. Thr. Its Financial Secretary And Principal Secretary Government Of Haryana Industries Department

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Arun Mishra
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:23 Sept 2013
CNR:SCIN010350932011

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Case Registered

Listed On:

12 Jan 2012

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

à ITEM NO.26 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION IVB 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.A. SAYEED Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2222/2012 GIAN CHAND JAIN & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for PERMISSION TO FILE ADDL. GROUNDS,permission to file additional documents and prayer for interim relief and office report) Date: 23/09/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prasenjit Keswani, Adv. Mrs V.D. Khanna,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Aman Preet Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar,Adv. Mr. B.K.Satija ,Adv Mr. Manjit Singh, Adv. Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta ,Adv Mr. Ashutosh Thakur, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Shekhar ,Adv Mr. A.V. Balan, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In a week's time, the learned Advocate, Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 to clarify the ambiguity of filing the vakalatnama and counter affidavit, failing which, further necessary orders, as per rules, shall be passed. Respondent Nos.4, 6 and 7 have been already ordered to proceed ex parte, vide order dated 26.8.2013. Item No.26 -2- Respondent No.3 is already ordered to proceed ex parte, as the

learned counsel has failed to rectify the omission/office objection in the vakalatnama filed on record.

Right of respondent No.8 to file counter affidavit has already been exhausted vide order dated 26.8.2013.

Similarly, vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent No.9 is also reported to be defective as deficit court fee of Rs.8/- has not been paid. Omission be rectified by the next date.

Respondent No.10 is granted three weeks' time, as final chance, for filing counter affidavit on record.

The learned counsel for the petitioner to file the process fee and spare copies as well as complete address in respect of respondent Nos.5, 11 and 12 within two weeks and on compliance, notice be issued forthwith through the concerned District Court, in addition to the postal service.

List again on 1.11.2013.

(M.A. SAYEED)
REGISTRAR

rd

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(55) - 13 Nov 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(54) - 6 Nov 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(53) - 27 Oct 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(52) - 11 Aug 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(51) - 4 Aug 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(50) - 26 Jul 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(49) - 10 Jul 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(47) - 4 Jan 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(48) - 4 Jan 2017

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(45) - 5 Dec 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(46) - 5 Dec 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(42) - 7 Oct 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(43) - 7 Oct 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(44) - 7 Oct 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(39) - 2 Sept 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(40) - 2 Sept 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(41) - 2 Sept 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(36) - 26 Jul 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(37) - 26 Jul 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(38) - 26 Jul 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(32) - 3 Mar 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(33) - 3 Mar 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(34) - 3 Mar 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(35) - 3 Mar 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(29) - 7 Jan 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(30) - 7 Jan 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(31) - 7 Jan 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(26) - 29 Oct 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(27) - 29 Oct 2015

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(28) - 29 Oct 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(23) - 11 Aug 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(24) - 11 Aug 2015

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(25) - 11 Aug 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(21) - 6 May 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(22) - 6 May 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(19) - 26 Mar 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(20) - 26 Mar 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(17) - 9 Feb 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(18) - 9 Feb 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(16) - 9 Dec 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(15) - 10 Oct 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(14) - 21 Jul 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(13) - 1 Apr 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(12) - 20 Jan 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(11) - 9 Dec 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(10) - 1 Nov 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(9) - 23 Sept 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Viewing

Order(8) - 26 Aug 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(7) - 15 Jul 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(6) - 30 Apr 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(5) - 20 Mar 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(4) - 12 Feb 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(3) - 15 Jan 2013

ROP

Click to view

Order(2) - 9 May 2012

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(1) - 30 Jan 2012

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view
Similar Case Search

Same Parties

Search in District Courts Data