Rudrendra Mohan Chatterjee v. Union Of India

19.02. 2021 jb.

W.P.A. 9287 of 2020 Ms. Sanjukta Ray .... For the Respondent UCO Bank This matter has come up at the instance of the respondent Bank. It is submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the Bank that on 8th February, 2021 when the matter was heard, she had appeared on line but could not be heard. Thus, the name of the learned advocate has been inadvertently not recorded in the said order dated 8th February, 2021. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondent Bank that she has taken consent of the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner in this regard.

In view of the aforesaid, the name of the Advocate appearing for the respondent Bank be incorporated in the order dated 8th February, 2021 and the line in the 4th paragraph i.e. 'None appears on behalf of the respondent bank' be deleted.

The Department is directed to make necessary corrections in the said order dated 8th February, 2021 to the aforesaid extent.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.)