Idio Construction & Industries (India) ... vs Renu Singh And Others

IN THE MATTER OF: IDIO Construction & Industries (India) Ltd. & Ors. Through its Director Awadhesh Kumar (Authorized) ...Appellant Versus Renu Singh & Ors. ...Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Uma Shankar Gautam, Advocate For Respondents :

ORDER

17.04.2023: On 09.02.2023, Proxy Counsel informed that Mr. Uma

Shankar Gautam, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant was unwell and in hospital

and appeal was got adjourned. Thereafter on 22.02.2023, Mr. Uma Shankar

Gautam, Ld. Counsel appeared and requested for adjourning the appeal on the

ground that Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. Rajesh Tandon, who was to appear on behalf

of the Appellant was unwell and adjournment was sought for, which was

allowed. Again, on 27.02.2023, this court recorded that no order has been

passed on condonation of delay petition, however on the request of the

Counsel, the appeal was adjourned. On the date it was submitted that

settlement process was going on. Today, again when the appeal was taken up a

prayer was made by Mr. Uma Shankar Gautam, Ld. Counsel for adjourning the

appeal. Firstly, he submitted that there is other connected matter. Thereafter

he submitted that he wanted to file Interlocutory application which was not

permitted by the Registry. Lastly, he submitted that at least on the ground of

personal difficulty of Sr. Counsel, the appeal may be adjourned. -2-

The present appeal has been filed much beyond the period of limitation.

Till date neither petition for condonation of delay has been pressed nor delay

has been condoned. It appears that appellant is not interested to pursue the

appeal. This is the reason that one way or the other the appellant is getting

unnecessary adjournment without even pressing the condonation of delay

petition. The appeal stands dismissed.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Alok Srivasatava] Member (Technical)

sr/gc

Company Appeal (AT) No. 18 of 2023