This single-judge order allows condonation of delay in filing an appeal against a Phase-I final impugned order. The case is listed for hearing with another matter.
Condonation of delay in filing appeal allowed; case listed for hearing on 04.03.2024.
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. 668/2022 Date: 28.11.2023
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs. Vaibhav Bansal
Present: Shri Abhinav Gaur, counsel for the appellant-F.I., Shri V. K. Shukla, counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3,
The office report dated 24.11.2023 shows that inspite of last opportunity being granted to the appellant to take steps for service of notice upon the respondent nos. 4 to 6, no steps have been taken by the appellant. Accordingly, it appears that the appellant does not want to press any relief against the respondent nos. 4 to 6.
Learned counsel for the respondents states that he has no objection if delay condonation application is allowed and the appeal may be listed for hearing.
In view of the above, the delay condonation application is allowed and the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.
List this case along with appeal Dy. No. 546/2022 for hearing on 04.03.2024.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.
Vaibhav Bansal
R. D. Khare
As recorded by the court registry
8 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
