Parnika Commercial And Estates Private Limited VS Union Of India

The petition under discussion was heard through a video conferencing session, ensuring that all parties could participate remotely. During the session, the learned counsel representing the petitioners made a statement indicating that she had submitted a specific document or piece of evidence relevant to the case. This filing by the counsel is an essential part of the proceedings, contributing to the arguments or the body of evidence that the court will consider in making its decision. The use of video conferencing reflects modern adaptations in the legal system to ensure that judicial processes can continue efficiently, even when in-person meetings are not possible. This adaptation helps maintain the continuity and accessibility of legal proceedings.

In the case at hand, the petition was heard via video conferencing, a method increasingly adopted in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure the continuation of judicial processes while adhering to social distancing protocols.

The learned counsel for the petitioners presented two significant documents for the court’s consideration:

1. Administrative Circular dated 18th September, 2020: This circular, presumably issued by a relevant administrative body, likely contains guidelines or protocols pertinent to the case. The content of this circular, although not detailed in the summary, may involve procedural changes, regulatory updates, or directives that impact the legal arguments or the court’s handling of the petition.

2. Decision of the Bombay High Court: The counsel also referenced a prior decision from the Bombay High Court. This decision could serve as a legal precedent or a persuasive authority relevant to the current case. It may provide insights into similar legal issues, judicial reasoning, or outcomes that could influence the court’s ruling in the present petition.

By presenting these documents, the petitioners’ counsel aims to support their arguments and provide the court with additional context and authoritative references. The administrative circular may offer up-to-date procedural guidance, while the Bombay High Court decision can bolster the petitioners’ position by demonstrating how similar issues have been adjudicated in the past.

The use of video conferencing for the hearing exemplifies the judiciary’s adaptation to contemporary challenges, ensuring that legal proceedings continue unabated despite external disruptions. This method maintains the principles of justice and accessibility, allowing parties to present their cases effectively while adhering to health and safety guidelines.

The petition hearing took place via video conferencing. The learned counsel for the petitioners informed the court that she has filed an administrative circular dated September 18, 2020, along with a decision from the Bombay High Court. The court instructed that these documents should be brought on record immediately and emailed to the Court Master within the day. The next hearing is scheduled for October 23, 2020.

In the recent hearing conducted via video conferencing, the court reviewed a petition. The counsel representing the petitioners mentioned that she had submitted an administrative circular from September 18, 2020, along with a decision from the Bombay High Court. The counsel requested that these documents be officially recorded and emailed to the Court Master by the end of the day. The court has scheduled the next hearing for October 23, 2020. Additionally, the court ordered that the decision and order be uploaded to the court’s website promptly, and a copy of the order should also be sent to the petitioners’ counsel via email.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: