Supreme Court issued notice for restoration as counsel for appellant inadvertently served admission affidavit instead of restoration application while also listing case for hearing on a future date.
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.
M.A. No. 23/2021 In Regular Appeal No. 02/2020 Date: 01.11.2022
Kavita Srivastava Vs. Union Bank of India
Present: Shri Amit Khanna, counsel for the appellant, Shri Sandeep Arora, counsel for the respondent-Bank,
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that due to inadvertent mistake, he has served the copy of affidavit of service to the counsel for the respondent-bank instead of copy of restoration application, which has been served today in court.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank may file response to the restoration application by the next date.
List this case on 19.01.2023 for restoration.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
VN Giri
Kavita Srivastava
Union Bank of India
R. D. Khare
VN Giri
As recorded by the court registry
5 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
