Kaycee Investment Pvt Ltd Etc vs. Suruchi Chand And Ors. Etc

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION III

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 MS. APARNA AJITSARIA

Civil Appeal No(s). 3253-3254/2016

SURUCHI CHAND . & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

KAYCEE INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. . & ORS. Respondent(s)

(ONLY CA. 3253-54/2016 and C.A. NO. 3256-3257/2016 LISTED )

WITH

C.A. No. 3256-3257/2016 (XII-A)

(ONLY FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON IA 144866/2023)

Date : 03-05-2024 These appeals were called on for hearing today.

For Appellant(s)

Mr. D. Abhinav Rao, AOR Mr. Rahul Jajoo, Adv. Mr. Devadipta das, Adv. Ms. Prerna Robin, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Gautam Bajaj, Adv. Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Ms. Miranda Solaman, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Umesh Kumar Khaitan, AOR Ms. Nishtha Wadhwa, Adv. Ms. Praveena Gautam, AOR Mr. Venkateswara Rao Anumolu, AOR M/S. M. Rambabu And Co., AOR Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR

Digitally signed by PRIYANKA MALIK Date: 2024.05.04 12:13:04 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified

Contd….

Mr. Gautam Bajaj, Adv. Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Ms. Miranda Solaman, Adv. Mr R.L.Singh, Adv. Mr Sandeep Singh Dingra, Adv. Ms Niharika Dewivedi, Adv. Ms Kajal Kumari, Adv. Ms Manisha Chawla, Adv. Ms Meena Singh, Adv. Mr. Birendra Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. D. Abhinav Rao, AOR Mr. Rahul Jajoo, Adv. Mr. Devadipta das, Adv. Ms. Prerna Robin, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Ms. Supragya Ram Mishra, Adv. Mr. Subhankar Singh, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR

Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR Ms. Chitrangada Singh, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

C.A. No. 3256-3257/2016

Respondent nos. 6 to 8 are common respondent nos. 5,7 and 8 in C.A. No.3254/2016 and are duly represented, hence notice is deemed to be served. None has entered appearance on behalf of the said respondents.

C.A. No.3253-3254/2016

C.A. No. 3253/2016

Respondent nos.1 to 7 are duly represented.

Contd….

C.A. No. 3254/2016

Respondent nos.1, 2, 5-9, 11 and 12 are duly represented.

Legal representatives of deceased respondent no.3 are served/duly represented.

Service is complete on respondent no.4 but none has entered appearance.

Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that though they have taken permission for paper publication, since the new particulars/address of respondent no.10 could be obtained, he had taken steps by courier and the tracking report of which shows that notice is duly served. Ld. Counsel for the appellant agrees that there is no rule which provides for acceptance of service by private courier and submits that he may be allowed to take steps by registered post by filing fresh particulars as well as spare copy in respect of respondent no.10. At this stage, ld. Counsel for the intervenors submits that the matter is of the year 2016 and hence it ought to be expedited. In view of the same, seven days time is granted to the ld. Counsel for the appellant to do the needful. If steps are taken, process as per rules and list again on 12.8.2014. If steps are not taken within the time granted, Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary directions.

APARNA AJITSARIA Registrar