RAMA VISION LIMITED Vs. COUVERY ELECRONICS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 16/11/2000, a direction was given to the parties to file their short synopsis within two weeks. Neither of the parties have filed any short synopsis. Today learned Counsel for the defendants says that she wants some more time to file a short synopsis. I do not think it appropriate to adjourn the matter for filing synopses since sufficient time has already been given.

(2.) On 10/01/2001, learned Counsel for the defendants took some time to argue the application for leave to defend. Since this application has been pending for the last more than a year, the request was acceded to on payment of Rs. 2,000.00 as costs. Today also learned Counsel for the defendants requests for some time to argue the matter. I do not think that such a request should be entertained.

(3.) The application for leave to defend was filed in August, 1996. For some reason it was given a number only in 1999.