This order notes that the matter was taken up on an urgent hearing application filed by the Respondent-Bank. The parties had settled the dispute, with the Applicant depositing Rs. 70.50 Lakhs. The Applicant sought withdrawal of the Special Appearance. The matter was dismissed as withdrawn in view of the settlement.
Special Appearance withdrawn.
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.
CONTD. ORDER . SHEET
PAGE NO.
CASE NO.
| DATE | DESCRIPTION OF THE ORDER | REMARK |
|---|---|---|
| sA34t24 06/03t25 |
Matterwastakenup onaUrgent Hearing application fitedon03/03/25bytheRespondent-Bank. TheCounselforRespondent Banksubmittedthatthe matterhasbeensettledbetweenthePartiesandas perthetermsofsetttementtheAppticantshave depositedthesettlementamountofRs.70.50Lakh andtheRespondent-Bank hasclosedtheaccount of theAppticant. ApplicantsbyShri AvaneeshYadav, Advocate Respondent-Bank by Shri Sanjeev Dubey, Advocate |
|
| CounselfortheAppticantsfairtyconsentedtothe submissionsmade bytheCounselforRespondentBank andpraystoa[[owtheAppticantstowithdrawalof thepresentSA. |
||
| ln viewofthefact that thematterhasbeen settted betweenthePartiesandaccordingtytheAppticants have depositedanamountofRs.70.50Lakhtowards fu[[andfinalsettlementoftheduesas we[Lasin viewofthesubmissionmadeby theCounselfor Appticantthathemaybealtowedtowithdrawthe presentSA,thematterstandsdismissedas withdrawn.Recordbeconsignedtorecordroom. atel) Presidin officer |
Applicants
Respondent-Bank
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
