Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 7 CA / 236/2025
NEELAM Vs. SANDEEP KUMAR
(KARAWAL NAGAR)
09.01.2026
Present: Appellant is present.
Sh. R. S. Panwar, Ld. Counsel for appellant through VC.
Sh. Krishna Prasad Yadav, Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 1
and 4.
Respondent no. 4 is present.
Respondent no. 1 is also present through VC.
Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent no.1 and 4.
Fresh memo of appearance is also filed on behalf of
respondent no. 2 and 3. The same are taken on record.
Reply to the present appeal is filed on behalf of respondent
no.1. The same is taken on record. Copy of the same already stand
supplied to the appellant.
At this stage, it is further submitted by Ld. Counsel for all
the respondents that respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 do not wish to file any
separate reply to the present appeal as well as application seeking
condonation of delay filed on behalf of the appellant. It is stated that the
reply already filed on behalf of respondent no.1 be also treated as the
reply of respondent no. 2 to 4.
It is further stated that respondent no. 1 also does not wish
to file any separate reply to the application of the appellant seeking
condonation of delay.
In view of the submissions, the reply filed on behalf of
respondent no. 1 shall be treated as the reply of all the respondents to the
present appeal.
-- 1 of 2 --
Put up for arguments on 02.03.2026.
The appellant is at liberty to file his rejoinder, if any, to the
reply of the respondents by NDOH with advance copy to the respondent
side.
(BALWINDER SINGH)
ASJ (FTC)/North-
East/KKD Courts/
Delhi/09.01.2026
-- 2 of 2 --