Thread by @barandbench

Delhi High Court hears plea by Mohit Saraf, Senior Partner, L&L Partners against the firm's Founder Partner, Rajiv Luthra.

Matter is before Justice V Kameswar Rao

AM Singhvi: Since mediation has failed... we will file a reply and the matter may be heard tomorrow.

Court: I take it Mr Tripathi, no rejoinder. Or do you want to file?

Court faces audio disruption. Court orally remarks that maybe he needs to get 2-3 laptops.

Adv. Parag Tripathi, remarks in lighter vein when he is finally audible: At my age, laptops are not the thing for me.

Counsel submits that the matter may be taken up tomorrow itself.

Court says it can hear the matter finally tomorrow.

Court adds: Kaul, Mr Tripathy, we are finally hearing the matter. Not on the issue of interim relief, (but) with regard prayers made in the petition.

Tripathy asks if Court would permit a compilation of judgements

Court says there is no issue but asks again what the Court should be hearing (final hearing or not).

Tripathy suggests that the Court may hear on the aspect of an interim arrangement to give mediation a last chance

Tripathy: I cannot go for another round of mediation without protection. That no reasonable person can accept.

... Court may hear it as a way to mediation, to give mediation one last opportunity.

AM Singhvi: I have something to say in half a minute. I have instructions.. we are quite happy to go on final hearing. it prevents duplicated hearings. The correct course is to hear it finally.

It is suggested before Court that the matter be taken up on Friday for arguments by petitioner (Saraf) and that response to the same may be made on Monday.

Senior Adv Neeraj Kishan Kaul agrees to respond on Monday pre-lunch

Court records in order:

- Reply to the petition would be made in the course of today
- Rejoinder by Petitioner (Saraf) in two days thereto, by 5 pm, Thursday
- Mohit Saraf v. Rajiv Luthra case to be listed for Friday, November 6 for hearing (petitioner will start with arguments)

Court also records that it has received the mediation report

Adv Haripriya Padmanabhan requests that the mediation report not be made public/part of the court's order

Adv Tripathy says what was argued before mediator should remain confidential, otherwise, there is nothing wrong with the report being added.

Sr Adv Kaul object, says it would be against the very principle of mediation if the report is disclosed.

Sr Adv Gopal Sankaranarayanan appears for Respondent no. 3 in the matter, registers objection to Saraf placing any reliance on allegations made against R3 in additional documents filed.

After taking instructions, Adv Tripathy tells Court that:

Without prejudice to his case, Saraf is not seeking relief, at this stage, against respondents 2-7 (Respondent 1 being Rajiv Luthra) and that they may be deleted from the array of parties.

Court records statement made for Saraf, on instructions.

Orders that amended memo of parties to be filed in a day.

Matter to be taken up on Friday, November 6.

Delhi High Court to hear Mohit Saraf v. Rajiv Luthra on Friday after Mediation talks fail

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…