LAWS(DLH)-2015-3-387

CANBANK FACTORS LTD Vs. UNIWORD TELECOM LTD

Decided On March 27, 2015
Canbank Factors Ltd Appellant
V/S
Uniword Telecom Ltd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the last date of hearing, a Settlement Agreement had been forwarded by the Mediation Centre. However, as none was present on behalf of the plaintiff, in the interest of justice, the case was adjourned for today.

(2.) TODAY , when the case was taken up on the first call, counsel for the plaintiff was absent. Even on the second call, he did not present himself. In the post lunch session, Mr. Yogesh Swroop, Advocate enters appearance and states that the arguing counsel, Mr. P.K. Mittal was present in the court complex in the pre -lunch session but has had to go home.

(3.) THE Court does not see any justification for the absence of the counsel for the plaintiff, particularly, when he is aware of the fact that a Settlement Agreement has been placed on record and he had remained absent even on the last date of hearing. While declining to adjourn the case once again, the case is proceeded with further.