The Court condoned delay in condonation of delay and appeal filed by Bridge Track and Tower Pvt. Ltd. against OSA CAD. Notice was given to respondent despite late representation, and appeal was listed for admission.
Condonation of delay allowed; Appeal listed for admission on 16.12.2024.
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.
C.M.P. NO. 1711 OF 2024 IN OSA (CAD) SR. NO.146005 OF 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-12-2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY C.M.P. NO. 1711 OF 2024 IN OSA (CAD) SR. NO.146005 OF 2022
BRIDGE TRACK AND TOWER PVT. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY LEGAL MANAGER CHANDRANATH BHATTACHARYA HAVING OFFICE AT 18, R.N.MUKHERJEE ROAD 6TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 001
PETITIONER
Vs
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH PCR/SR REPRESENTED BY DY.CE/TP/HQ, PCE OFFICE SOUTHERN RAILWAYS PARK TOWN CHENNAI - 600 003
RESPONDENT
For Appellant(s):
MS. TUSHITHA FOR MR. HITESH SINGHVI
For Respondent(s):
MR.N.RAMESH SENIOR PANEL STANDING COUNSEL
Page 1 of 3
C.M.P. NO. 1711 OF 2024 IN OSA (CAD) SR. NO.146005 OF 2022
- - - - -
ORDER
(made by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice)
Counsel for petitioner states that appeal as well as condonation delay application was served way back in 2022. No reply is filed opposing the application. Mr. N. Ramesh states that he was appointed by the respondent only in April 2024. But, he is at a loss to explain why he did not inform petitioner's advocate about his appointment or collect papers from the earlier advocate or ask advocate for petitioner to serve copy of all the papers.
Appeal be listed for admission on 16.12.2024.
(K.R.SHRIRAM, C.J.) (SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.) 04-12-2024
Page 2 of 3
C.M.P. NO. 1711 OF 2024 IN OSA (CAD) SR. NO.146005 OF 2022
cad
Page 3 of 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the condonation application and service of appeal should be condoned.
Whether the respondent has any valid ground to oppose the condonation of delay.
Whether the present order is sufficient to admit the appeal for hearing.
BRIDGE TRACK AND TOWER PVT. LTD.
UNION OF INDIA
K.R.SHRIRAM
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
