SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(SC) 966

LALIT MOHAN SHARMA, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH, J.S.VERMA, K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY, S.C.AGRAWAL
M. Manihar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

In spite of our direction on the last date for the personal appearance of Dr. H.B. Singh today, he is not present. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate representing him makes a prayer for adjournment after he placed before us for inclusion in the record a copy of a letter written by Dr. H.B. Singh to him indicating that Dr. H.B. Singh wants time for reflection after taking the opinion of the other Presiding Officers. We are not inclined to adjourn the case for that purpose. On further reflection Mr. Bhattacharya has made a prayer for a short adjournment on the ground that he will be advising Dr. H.B. Singh to file an affidavit giving an unconditional undertaking to appear in person in the Court in pursuance of a direction of this Court. He also states that he will advise Dr. H.B. Singh to make a separate application for condoning his absence and exempting his personal presence in the Court on a consideration of all the circumstances to be set out in the Petition.

2. We have heard in part Mr. G. Ramaswamy, Attorney General and Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel. Having considered the matter, we are adjourning the case to Friday i.e., 25.10.92 at 10.30 A.M. to unable Dr.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top