M/S Inderjit Mehta Construction Pvt Ltd v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~25 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ARB.P. 691/2019 M/S INDERJIT MEHTA CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD..... Petitioner Through:

None.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 02.03.2020 I.A. 2903/2020 (modification of orders dated 30.10.2019 & 24.01.2020) 1.

This is an application filed by the respondents praying for recording the correct name of its counsel namely Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad in the orders dated 30.10.2019 and 24.01.2020. The application is duly supported by an affidavit of Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad, Advocate, who submits that he had duly appeared on both dates but the appearance of one Mr. Anil Dabas, Advocate was inadvertently recorded on behalf of the respondents on 30.10.2019. Similarly on 24.01.2020 when the petition came to be disposed of, his appearance was inadvertently not recorded even though he had filed a reply and duly appeared before the Court.

2.

An advance copy of the application has been served to the learned counsel for the petitioner, but none appears for the petitioner. DigitallySigned By:MANJU BHATT 17:29:24

It appears that the petitioner has no objection to the application being allowed. Even otherwise, the application is duly supported by the affidavit of Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad and, therefore, I have no reason to doubt his plea that he was duly present on both 30.10.2019 and 24.01.2020. It further emerges from the record that Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad had appeared on 05.12.2019 on which date his appearance had been recorded. It is, therefore, evident that there has been an inadvertent typographical error in the aforesaid two orders, the same are accordingly corrected and it is directed that appearance of Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad be shown in the orders dated 30.10.2019 and 24.01.2020.

3.

The application is disposed of.

REKHA PALLI, J.

MARCH 02, 2020 'sdp'

DigitallySigned By:MANJU BHATT 17:29:24