(Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ.)
Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ________________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Topworth Infra Pvt. Ltd. ____________________________ Respondent.
Miscellaneous Application No. 1536/2020 In SLP (C) No(s). 9672/2020, decided on September 4, 2020
(For Admission and IA No. 82814/2020-Modification)
Miscellaneous Application No. 1536/2020; SLP (C) No(s). 9672/2020; SLP(C) No. No. 9672/2020; and IA No. 82814/2020
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Mr. Anukul Raj, learned Advocate has stated on oath that he did not engage any Senior Advocate on the date of hearing of the Special Leave Petition. Since this is the case, we modify our order dated 25.08.2020. The order on merits survives. However, the remarks against the advocate being “Despite the fact that the mike was on and despite the fact that he was told by the Court at least three times that he should open his mouth, he purposely did not do so because he was waiting for a Senior Advocate. He should have come upfront with the Court and informed the Court that he was waiting for the Senior Advocate instead of indulging in tactics of this kind. We strongly deprecate tactics of this kind. We do not want advocates to take advantage of a non-physical hearing system when it is working on both sides. However, despite all this we have still heard the learned counsel” stand expunged.
2. M.A. stands disposed of.
———
