R.R.YADAV
Bhandari Das – Appellant
Versus
Sushila – Respondent
(2). An affidavit filed in support of the condonation of delay reveals that learned counsel Shri Kuldeep Sharma assured to the appellant to inform him whenever it is required. It is also alleged that Shri Kuldeep Sharma learned counsel informed him that he is not responsible for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act but such compensation is to be paid by the Insurance Company. Learned coun- sel Shri Kuldeep Sharma also assured the appellant that he is not required to contact him on each any every date. It is pertinent to note that in support of aforesaid averments no affidavit of Shri Kuldeep Sharma is filed.
(3). The aforesaid assertions made in the affidavit do not inspire my confidence. No counsel can afford to advise his client not to attend the Court on each and every date and if such undertaking was given by him in the trial court, then, he was required to fulfil it.
(4). The averments made in the affidavit to the effect that neither their counsel infor
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.