Today was a substantive hearing after more than a year.
1. Bajrangi has changed his lawyer who does not appear to be well known (have not seen him previously) 2. This new lawyer was complaining that the defendant has not been supplied with a copy of the plaint even after 3 years. Anuradha Dutt appearing for Plaintiff refuted but the judge directed her to provide defendant with the entire case record. Anuradha Dutt strangely said that Plaintiff has annexed the firm profile of NDA in a sealed envelope and does not want to give it to the Defendant even though they have relied on it in her plaint. I could not understand why is NDA's profile in a sealed envelope and why does Plaintiff want to keep it confidential. 3. The counsel for the defendant also asked the Judge to dismiss the suit because there is no substance in the plaint and the Plaintiff is refusing to supply the complete plaint. The Judge was furious and threatened to impose heavy cost on the Defendant after which the counsel backed down but said that he will move O7R11. 4. Anuradha Dutt started arguing that the Defendant be put behind bars for his persistent contemptous conduct. She started narrating some long story on how the Defendant had stolen data from one of the lawyers of NDA who happens to be his estranged wife and now using this data to target his wife. Defendant's counsel refuted and stated that the Defendant is a whistleblower. Then Anuradha Dutt read some orders of the predecessors where a contempt notice was issued to defendant for handing over a hard disk to black money commission, but this order mentioned that Defendant had filed complaints with some statutory body through another advocate. She also read another order where J. Harishankar had recused himself. At this point the Judge said that this matter is going to take time and put it up for next year in January. Anurdha Dutt protested and asked for a short date but the Judge did not oblige. 5. Anuradha Dutt also mentioned that Defendant was making a movie on this case and that he should be restrained but the judge ignored. She also mentioned something about Mozzam who was the Plaintiff's counsel earlier which I could not understand. She said something like that Mozzam had written to Defendant that he had gotten him fired from this case.
This suit is some drama. Bajrangi was present during the hearing. I was hoping that he would be some hunk given the pseudonym ▮▮▮
Today was a hearing in this matter. Some progress after years of adjournments.
1. NDA's application to initiate contempt against Bajrangi for publishing the news story in Pioneer dismissed because NDA could not produce any evidence to show that Bajrangi was behind the publishing of the news story. NDA's counsel could only state that there could be no one other than Bajrangi who could have gotten that story published. The judge (HMJ Navin Chawla) was very clear that contempt jurisdiction is quasi criminal and the standard of proof is high and contempt cannot be adjudicated on mere conjectures or surmises.
2. Bajrangi's counsel stated that a notice be issued to Pioneer to find if Bajrangi had any role to play in the publishing of the article. The judge was willing to issue notice to Pioneer but NDA's counsel requested that Pioneer may be directed to not publish anything pertaining to the notice to which the Judge refused and NDA's contempt application was dismissed.
3. The judge asked Bajrangi to give an undertaking that he will not speak to media about NDA's leaked data, and that if he makes such a statement then the suit will be disposed of. Bajrangi point blank refused and said that he wants to approach the media to expose the large scale tax evasion being abetted by NDA. The judge then passed an injunction order prohibiting Bajrangi from speaking with media. Bajrangi protested and stated that he will challenge the order.
4. Bajrangi's counsel also filed a O7R11 for dismissal of the suit as it does not disclose any cause of action. Judge issued notice. The judge did indicate that the entire suit is based on conjectures and surmises.
Today a fiery hearing. Both sides the gloves are off:
1. LC in this case Adv Shashank Garg was summoned. He was asked why he has not concluded the execution of the commission even after 3 years. He had no clue. He said that he was under the impression that the commission was over and that he had been discharged. The judge frowned. Bajrangi complained that three of his seized devices are still with the LC. LC said that he has those three devices but does not remember where he has kept it. He was directed to trace those devices and file a final report of the commission.
2. NDA pressed for contempt against Bajrangi for appearing on the podcast. Bajrangi was unrepentant and stated that he will file a detailed reply. He objected to the fact that NDA has annexed an email with the contempt application but they have obfuscated all the details out of that document. Bajrangi insisted that he be given the complete email for him to file a reply. NDA said that it cannot as it has personal details of a spouse of one of its employees. I am at a loss how any spouse of an employee be related to podcast. Any idea?
3. Bajrangi filed a cross contempt saying that NDA has been sharing confidential material of this suit with his wife who is then using it against him. I did not know that his wife is a co defendant in this suit even though she has not appeared in this matter ever. Bajrangi alleged that NDA has breached the confidentiality club by sharing documents from this suit. NDA denied doing so. Judge mentioned hauling up the registry for giving out confidential documents to those not part of the confidentiality club. He issued notice of contempt to Bajrangi's wife to explain how she got access to the confidential documents of the suit.
4. Interestingly NDA has listed several documents that it has relied upon in its plaint but not submitted any of the documents. Bajrangi filed a discovery application and there was strong opposition from NDA. Its stand was that if they share that documents then Bajrangi will misuse and disseminate them. One of the documents is firm profile and NDA doesn't want to submit it but yet rely on it. There was also some mention of some investigation report. This all looks so strange. What kind of litigation is this? How can you not submit documents in suit? Anyways, the judge after a lot of heated arguments issued notice to NDA to put their objections on an affidavit.
5. NDA brought to the notice of the Court that Bajrangi has not filed a written statement even after 3 years. He said how can he file a reply when he has not been given the compete plaint and the LC has also not submitted a report post completion of commission. The judge seemed inclined to close the right of the defendant to file written statement but stopped short of doing it.
No law college student should follow the proceedings in this suit as it will leave them thoroughly confused. This suit seems to be having its own procedure. Unless laws have changed since I graduated and I have failed to keep pace with the latest.
The new counsel is not so unknown. He was particularly active in the COVID PILs and took Harish Salve head on.
Defendant had filed O7R11 for dismissal. Judge tried to push his counsel to withdraw or otherwise he would impose heavy cost. Defendant refused to withdraw.
Moazzam Khan's part is all wrong. Nishith Desai had replaced him with Anuradha Dutt last year as he though Moazzam was unable to stop the defendant from sharing the leaked data and the story with Black Money Commission and journalists. But the truth is that this case got messy not because of Moazzam but because of inane strategy of Nishith himself. Moazzam was just made a scapegoat.
1. Bajrangi has changed his lawyer who does not appear to be well known (have not seen him previously)
2. This new lawyer was complaining that the defendant has not been supplied with a copy of the plaint even after 3 years. Anuradha Dutt appearing for Plaintiff refuted but the judge directed her to provide defendant with the entire case record. Anuradha Dutt strangely said that Plaintiff has annexed the firm profile of NDA in a sealed envelope and does not want to give it to the Defendant even though they have relied on it in her plaint. I could not understand why is NDA's profile in a sealed envelope and why does Plaintiff want to keep it confidential.
3. The counsel for the defendant also asked the Judge to dismiss the suit because there is no substance in the plaint and the Plaintiff is refusing to supply the complete plaint. The Judge was furious and threatened to impose heavy cost on the Defendant after which the counsel backed down but said that he will move O7R11.
4. Anuradha Dutt started arguing that the Defendant be put behind bars for his persistent contemptous conduct. She started narrating some long story on how the Defendant had stolen data from one of the lawyers of NDA who happens to be his estranged wife and now using this data to target his wife. Defendant's counsel refuted and stated that the Defendant is a whistleblower. Then Anuradha Dutt read some orders of the predecessors where a contempt notice was issued to defendant for handing over a hard disk to black money commission, but this order mentioned that Defendant had filed complaints with some statutory body through another advocate. She also read another order where J. Harishankar had recused himself. At this point the Judge said that this matter is going to take time and put it up for next year in January. Anurdha Dutt protested and asked for a short date but the Judge did not oblige.
5. Anuradha Dutt also mentioned that Defendant was making a movie on this case and that he should be restrained but the judge ignored. She also mentioned something about Mozzam who was the Plaintiff's counsel earlier which I could not understand. She said something like that Mozzam had written to Defendant that he had gotten him fired from this case.
This suit is some drama. Bajrangi was present during the hearing. I was hoping that he would be some hunk given the pseudonym ▮▮▮
1. NDA's application to initiate contempt against Bajrangi for publishing the news story in Pioneer dismissed because NDA could not produce any evidence to show that Bajrangi was behind the publishing of the news story. NDA's counsel could only state that there could be no one other than Bajrangi who could have gotten that story published. The judge (HMJ Navin Chawla) was very clear that contempt jurisdiction is quasi criminal and the standard of proof is high and contempt cannot be adjudicated on mere conjectures or surmises.
2. Bajrangi's counsel stated that a notice be issued to Pioneer to find if Bajrangi had any role to play in the publishing of the article. The judge was willing to issue notice to Pioneer but NDA's counsel requested that Pioneer may be directed to not publish anything pertaining to the notice to which the Judge refused and NDA's contempt application was dismissed.
3. The judge asked Bajrangi to give an undertaking that he will not speak to media about NDA's leaked data, and that if he makes such a statement then the suit will be disposed of. Bajrangi point blank refused and said that he wants to approach the media to expose the large scale tax evasion being abetted by NDA. The judge then passed an injunction order prohibiting Bajrangi from speaking with media. Bajrangi protested and stated that he will challenge the order.
4. Bajrangi's counsel also filed a O7R11 for dismissal of the suit as it does not disclose any cause of action. Judge issued notice. The judge did indicate that the entire suit is based on conjectures and surmises.
1. LC in this case Adv Shashank Garg was summoned. He was asked why he has not concluded the execution of the commission even after 3 years. He had no clue. He said that he was under the impression that the commission was over and that he had been discharged. The judge frowned. Bajrangi complained that three of his seized devices are still with the LC. LC said that he has those three devices but does not remember where he has kept it. He was directed to trace those devices and file a final report of the commission.
2. NDA pressed for contempt against Bajrangi for appearing on the podcast. Bajrangi was unrepentant and stated that he will file a detailed reply. He objected to the fact that NDA has annexed an email with the contempt application but they have obfuscated all the details out of that document. Bajrangi insisted that he be given the complete email for him to file a reply. NDA said that it cannot as it has personal details of a spouse of one of its employees. I am at a loss how any spouse of an employee be related to podcast. Any idea?
3. Bajrangi filed a cross contempt saying that NDA has been sharing confidential material of this suit with his wife who is then using it against him. I did not know that his wife is a co defendant in this suit even though she has not appeared in this matter ever. Bajrangi alleged that NDA has breached the confidentiality club by sharing documents from this suit. NDA denied doing so. Judge mentioned hauling up the registry for giving out confidential documents to those not part of the confidentiality club. He issued notice of contempt to Bajrangi's wife to explain how she got access to the confidential documents of the suit.
4. Interestingly NDA has listed several documents that it has relied upon in its plaint but not submitted any of the documents. Bajrangi filed a discovery application and there was strong opposition from NDA. Its stand was that if they share that documents then Bajrangi will misuse and disseminate them. One of the documents is firm profile and NDA doesn't want to submit it but yet rely on it. There was also some mention of some investigation report. This all looks so strange. What kind of litigation is this? How can you not submit documents in suit? Anyways, the judge after a lot of heated arguments issued notice to NDA to put their objections on an affidavit.
5. NDA brought to the notice of the Court that Bajrangi has not filed a written statement even after 3 years. He said how can he file a reply when he has not been given the compete plaint and the LC has also not submitted a report post completion of commission. The judge seemed inclined to close the right of the defendant to file written statement but stopped short of doing it.
No law college student should follow the proceedings in this suit as it will leave them thoroughly confused. This suit seems to be having its own procedure. Unless laws have changed since I graduated and I have failed to keep pace with the latest.
The new counsel is not so unknown. He was particularly active in the COVID PILs and took Harish Salve head on.
Defendant had filed O7R11 for dismissal. Judge tried to push his counsel to withdraw or otherwise he would impose heavy cost. Defendant refused to withdraw.
Moazzam Khan's part is all wrong. Nishith Desai had replaced him with Anuradha Dutt last year as he though Moazzam was unable to stop the defendant from sharing the leaked data and the story with Black Money Commission and journalists. But the truth is that this case got messy not because of Moazzam but because of inane strategy of Nishith himself. Moazzam was just made a scapegoat.