K.J. XAVIER Vs. K.A. AFSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a rather unfortunate situation where a very senior member of this Bar has sworn to an affidavit in support of this review petition, averring that he had not made any concessions on behalf of his client, as has been recorded in the judgment dated 06/08/2020. It is unfortunate not merely because the averments in the affidavit are contrary to truth, but also because the proceedings with respect to the suit in the Trial Court has now been delayed.

(2.) I must record that the above O.P was heard by me on 23/07/2020, when the learned counsel for the petitioners took time to confer with his clients as to whether the wall can be demolished, so that the trial of the suit can be proceeded at the earliest. The matter was, thereafter, listed on 28/07/2020, on which day, an application, namely I.A.No.1 of 2020, had been filed by the petitioners seeking that the matter be heard through video conferencing, since their learned counsel was unable to appear before this Court physically. This I.A. was allowed and this matter was listed on 29/07/2020; thereafter on 04/08/2020; and finally on 06/08/2020, when it was heard through a hybrid system, where the learned counsel for the petitioners appeared through video conferencing, while the learned counsel for the respondent were heard physically in Court, simultaneously.

(3.) The record of the proceedings clearly show that a concession was made before this Court that the wall in question will be demolished, so as to facilitate an early trial; and it was in such circumstances that the judgment, now sought to be reviewed, had been delivered.