Court rejected the appellants' urgency application seeking expedited hearing and dismissed the request to adjourn due to counsel's indisposition, keeping the case listed for 16.03.2023.
Urgency application I.A. No. 742/2022 rejected; case listed as on 16.03.2023.
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.
Regular Appeal No. 59/2022 Date: 06.01.2023
Sunil Kumar Thakur & Anr. Vs. State Bank of India & Ors.
Present: Shri Surya Prakash Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Shri Shiv Pratap, counsel for the appellants,
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the arguing counsel Shri Shiv Pratap is indisposed, therefore, he is unable to appear before this Tribunal today, hence, he seeks adjournment.
The urgency application has been filed by the appellants to expedite the hearing of the present case. As per report of the Registrar dated 26.12.2022, the matter is already fixed for 16.03.2023. There is no good ground made out by the learned counsel for the appellants for expediting the hearing of the present case, therefore, the urgency application being I.A. No. 742/2022 is rejected and let the case be listed on the date already fixed i.e. 16.03.2023.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Sunil Kumar Thakur & Anr.
State Bank of India & Ors.
R. D. Khare
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
