DHRAM PAL SINGH AND TAJINDER KAUR vs EARTH GALLERIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Hearing History (7)

• 26OCT 2023
  Hearing

  Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

  Matter is disposed off.

  Stage: DISPOSED

• 25OCT 2023
  Hearing

  Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN

  Matter is adjourned to 26.10.2023.

  Stage: PENDING

• 26JUL 2023
  Hearing

  Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN

  Both the counsels for the parties state at bar that the settlement talks are going on between the parties and request for a short adjournment. Request is allowed. Matter to come up on 25.10.2023 for further proceedings.

  Stage: PENDING

• 12APR 2023
  Hearing

  Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN

  The present complaint was filed on 28.04.2022 with the adjudicating officer and the reply on behalf of respondent no. 1 is not filed till date. Reply on behalf of respondent no. 2  was received on 20.09.2022. It has come to the notice of the authority that the copy of complaint sent by speed post by the registry of the authority  to respondent No.1 has been received back as un-delivered. None was present  on behalf of the respondent No.1 and it was decided that the notice for appearance and filing reply by respondent No.1 be published in the local newspapers at the cost of complainant. But inadvertently the public notice could not be published in the local newspaper on the expenses borne by the respondent. Registry is directed to publish the notice for appearance of the respondent No.1 alongwith reply on the next date of hearing. It will be the last opportunity failing which the respondent shall be proceeded against exparte.                     Matter to come up  on 26.07.2023 for further proceedings.

  Stage: PENDING

• 24JAN 2023
  Hearing

  Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN

  That on hearing dated 24.05.2022, no reply was received on behalf of the respondents. The counsel for respondent No.2 is filing vakalatnama today with a request for short adjournment for the reply. The counsel for the complainant states at bar that the copy of complaint was sent to the address as given on site of ROC as well as the address of R1 given in the MoU signed on 30.03.2015 i.e.  Earth Galleria Pvt. Ltd. The copy of complaint sent by speed post by the registry of the authority  to respondent No.1 has also been received back as un-delivered.  The notice for appearance and filing reply by respondent No.1 be published in the local newspapers at the cost of complainant. The respondents are directed to file reply within two weeks i.e., 07.06.2022 in the registry with an advanced copy to the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defense of the respondent may be struck off.  Reply of respondent no. 2 has been received. Inadvertently the public notice against the respondent No.1 could not be published in the local newspaper. Therefore one more opportunity is being granted to the complainant to publish the public notice in the newspaper at his own expenses against respondent no. 1 to appear before this authority alongwith reply. Matter to come up on 12.04.2023 for further proceedings.

  Stage: PENDING

• 28SEP 2022
  Hearing

  Judge: K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

  Due to paucity of time,  matter could not be heard.            Matter to come up on 24.01.2023 for further proceedings.

  Stage: PENDING

• 24MAY 2022
  Hearing

  Judge: K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

  The present complaint has been received on 28.04.2022. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint made to the respondent was submitted by the complainant as available in the file. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through speed post of which delivery was confirmed on 17.05.2022 to respondent No.2 as per tracking report of the speed post available in the file. And registry also sent notice along with complaint through email  at the following addresses – [email protected]  (complainant), [email protected] (respondent no.1 ) , [email protected] ( respondent no.2) . However, no reply has been received on behalf of the respondents till date. The counsel for respondent No.2 is filing vakalatnama today with a request for short adjournment for the reply. The counsel for the complainant states at bar that the copy of complaint was sent to the address as given on site of ROC as well as the address of R1 given in the MoU signed on 30.03.2015 i.e.  Earth Galleria Pvt. Ltd. The copy of complaint sent by speed post by the registry of the authority  to respondent No.1 has also been received back as un-delivered.  The notice for appearance and filing reply by respondent No.1 be published in the local newspapers at the cost of complainant.                   The respondents are directed to file reply within two weeks i.e., 07.06.2022 in the registry with an advanced copy to the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defense of the respondent may be struck off.                     Matter to come up on 28.09.2022 for further proceedings.

  Stage: FIRST HEARING

Orders (8)

• 26OCT 2023
  judgement

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 26OCT 2023
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 25OCT 2023
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 26JUL 2023
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 12APR 2023
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 24JAN 2023
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 28SEP 2022
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗
• 24MAY 2022
  order

  Order No: N/A

  View Order ↗

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗