Heard Ms. Parikh, learned advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Parikh has submitted that on earlier two occasions, the notice issued by the Court was returned unserved. She further submitted that the Court had directed publication of advertisement and in pursuance of the said direction, advertisement has been published. Even after publication of advertisement, no one has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent company.
Under the circumstances, the petitioner is justified in requesting that the order, as prayed for, may be passed. However, it is considered appropriate to give last chance to the respondent company before passing the final order, as prayed for.
Therefore, the proceedings are adjourned to 9.3.2012.
Office is directed to issue fresh notice mentioning the aforesaid direction therein. The notice to be made returnable on 9.3.2012. The notice shall also mention that it is only as an additional and last chance that the fresh notice, though not required particularly after publication of the advertisement, is issued.
In addition to normal mode of service, the registry shall forward the notice by Registered Speed Post, at the cost of the petitioner.
COMP/134/2010 2 ORDER The order passed on 3.10.2011 may also be incorporated in the said notice.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc