Manish Singh v. Uco Bank and 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
No proof of service publication filed for respondent no. 3; reply not filed by respondent no. 2. Oppositi
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Appeal Dy. No. 58/2020 Date: 12.12.2022
Manish Singh Vs. UCO Bank and Ors.
Present: None for the appellant, Shri Himanshu Tiwari, counsel for the respondent-Bank, None for the respondent no. 2,
The office report dated 09.12.2022 shows that no proof of publication has been filed by the counsel for the appellant to authenticate the service of notice upon the respondent no. 3 and no reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2. Accordingly, the opportunity of the respondent no. 2 for filing reply is hereby closed. Let the proof of publication be filed by the next date.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank undertakes to inform the learned counsel for the appellant about the order passed today in writing within 48 hours.
List this case on 27.03.2023 for service.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Service of notice on respondent no. 3 and filing of reply by respondent no. 2.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Manish Singh
- respondent
UCO Bank
- respondent
Respondent no. 2
- respondent
Respondent no. 3
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
5 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court