- 16 July 2015. Sole respondent has been served. Appellant has filed the statement of case but t he respondent has not filed the same. Stipulated time for the purpose has already expired. After the amendment in Supreme Court Rules, 2013, it is no more a mandate and it is presumed that List of Dates already filed is considered by t he
- 6 December 2018. Issue fresh notice for alternative arrangement in respect of the sole respondent. List again on 6.2.2019.
- 6 February 2019. Fresh notice for alternative arrangement be issued in respect of the sole respondent. List again on 1.4.2019.
- 1 April 2019. Office report in respect of the sole respondent indicates that service could not be effected due to “addressee not available despite multiple attempts “. Accordingly, ld. Counsel for the appellant prays for and is granted two weeks time to take fresh steps including filing of fresh address, if any, in that regard to ef
- 8 July 2019. Service is complete on the sole respondent but none has entered appearance. Process in terms of Order dated 16.7.2015.
- 29 July 2022. 1.List the matter after four weeks. 2.I.A. No. 75475/2022 for early hearing is disposed of.
- 3 April 2024. Sole respondent is served with notice of alternative arrangement, but there is no appearance. Sole appellant is served with notice of alternative arrangement, but there is no appearance.
- 9 July 2024. Erstwhile counsel of the sole appellant has been designated as Senior Advocate and the sole appellant is duly represented now as vakalatnama has been filed. Service is complete on sole respondent, but none has entered appearance.
- 4 June 2025. In view of the letter circulated by learned counsel for the appellant seeking adjournment, the matter be listed on 24.07.2025.
- 24 July 2025. It has been informed that the respondent-wife was served notice on two occasions. Initially, though, she had appeared; however, later on the power given to her counsel was withdrawn, leading the issuance of a second notice, which was also served in the year 2019.
- 10 September 2025. When the matter was taken up, the parties were present before the Court. The appellant was also represented by learned senior counsel. A fruitful discussion/exchange of ideas was held between the parties, the counsel and the Court. At the end of the day, it appears to the Court that there may be chances of the parties
- 27 October 2025. In view of the Office report, let the matter be considered with the main case on 06.11.2025.
- 6 November 2025. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that they may be referred to Supreme Court Mediation Centre. 2. It is submitted that though there were certain issues with regard to the mediation but the parties are confident that before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, they may be able to amicably work out a s
- 11 February 2026. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, list on 18.02.2026 on top of the Regular Hearing Board.
- 18 February 2026. signed order placed on the file. 2. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
- Counsel named on these orders, not a complete vakalatnama, include the advocates listed below.
Advocates — Appellants: Ms. Akanksha Kaushik, Ms. Shobha, Ms Devahuti Tamuli, Ms. Shobha Gupta, Mr Sourav Roy, Ms Joyeshree Barman, Ms Joyshree Barman, Mr. Rajendra Kr. Panigrahi, Mr. Nishant Bahuguna, Mr. Shubham Jalan, Ms. Prachi Sharma, Ms. Sakshi Tiwari Advocates — Respondents: Mr. V. Sushant Gupta, Dr. Kailash Chand, Mr. Chritarth Palli, Mr. Agam Aggarwal, Mr. Rajat Gupta
