9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... week from the date of resumption of regular functioning of the Court. Application is disposed of. LPA 293/2021 1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied with the order of the Learned Single Judge in WP(C) 4338/2021 dated 09.04.2021, Appellant (Original Petitioner) has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal. 2. Appellant in person submits that he had filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge of this Court impugning orders dated 12.10.2020 and 17.12.2020 passed by learned NCLAT, whereby directions were issued to the parties before the NCLAT to file brief written submissions and copies of the judgments on which they wanted to rely on at the time of arguments as also a direction to provide copies of the brief written sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 12.10.2020, NCLAT directed the parties before it to file brief written submissions and copies of the judgments they wished to rely on. It is submitted by the Appellant during the course of hearing that the written submissions were filed by the Appellant on 02.11.2020. 5. Vide further order dated 17.12.2020, the Appellant was directed to supply brief written submissions to the Respondent. Copy of the written submissions was not supplied by the Appellant and on 05.01.2021, the Appellant stated before NCLAT that he would not be able to provide a copy and that he had made a representation to the Acting Chairperson and the Members of the Appellate Tribunal that there was no provision which compelled the Appellant to provide written submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to meet the case of the other side more effectively at the time of final hearing. This Court fails to understand the prejudice caused to the Appellant by the impugned directions, more particularly, when the Respondent had also been directed to file the written submissions / judgments and the copy has been supplied to the Appellant, which is evident from reading of the orders passed by the NCLAT. We also notice that the NCLAT has only directed the parties to file written submissions not exceeding three pages but the Appellant has, on his own volition, chosen to file a voluminous paper book, for which only he can be blamed. 9. Insofar as a direction to exchange the written submissions between the parties is concerned, we do not find any meri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
