Md. Rafique v. The Central Bank Of India Amd ORS

19.09.2024 Court No.13 Item No.2 pk F. M. A. 280 of 2023 Md. Rafique Vs.

The Central Bank of India and others Mr. Nayan Rakshit ... For the appellant.

Mr. Bishwambhar Jha, ... For the Bank.

1. It is submitted by Mr. Nayan Rakshit, learned advocate on record for the appellant that his junior Ms. Dipa Roy had sought an accommodation on 10.09.2024 on behalf of Nayan Rakshit since he was unwell.

2. This Court had declined accommodation and the appeal itself was taken up for hearing. Let the name of Ms. Dipa Roy be included in place and stead of Mr. Nayan Rakshit for the appellant in the said order.

3. This Court is, however, of the view that the names of advocates are recorded on the basis of slips handed over by the junior advocate and the name of Mr. Nayan Rakshit must have been given by Ms. Dipa Roy as Mr. Rakshit was the advocate on record.

4. It is now difficult to ascertain as to whether Mr. Nayan Rakshit was there or not on 10th September, 2024.

5. Since Mr. Nayan Rakshit himself appears today and indicates that he was not present in Court on that day, let the name of Mr. Nayan Rakshit be deleted as having represented the appellant. The name of Ms. Dipa Roy shall be included as having represented on that day.

6. Let the aforesaid corrections be incorporated in the order dated 10.09.2024.

7. The other parts of the order dated 10.09.2024 shall remain unaltered.

8. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)