We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
AUD was represented by AOR Mohinder J.S.Rupal (formerly a partner at Gagrat & Co) and his son Hardik Rupal. The survivor was represented by AOR Goutham Shivshankar, a young counsel and NUJS alum.
The court passed this order: "This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. List on 6th September, 2023."
Thus, 10 hearings in 6 years so far, none of which involved substantive arguments. Is this fair to the survivor?
http://164.100.60.183/writereaddata/OrderSAN_PDF/pms/2023/1678193415375_73056_2023.pdf
Current status: 6 years, 14 hearings, still no hearing on substantive arguments by counsels. But at least some progress, so a decision by 2030 is possible, perhaps even earlier. Interesting that the survivor is not giving up but continuing to fight.