The hearing in SEBI-Sahara case witnessed a very interesting episode today as Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi expressed his displeasure (in strong words) about certain queries by Justice Ranjan Gogoi..Rohatgi, who is appearing for Sahara Housing, was asked by Gogoi J. whom he was representing in the matter. Rohatgi’s reply “one of the Group companies” did not satisfy Gogoi J. who proceeded to ask the Advocate-on-Record to make it clear which company Rohatgi was representing..An agitated Rohatgi made his dissatisfaction evident stating,.“This is not the way Court should doubt the counsel and who he is appearing for. I’m sorry your lordships.”.Rohatgi refrained from making any further arguments while also remarking to the AoR that he will not appear [in the matter] again..Meanwhile, Court today ordered Sahara to deposit Rs. 1500 crore by September 7. Request for extension of time for payment was turned down by the Bench with the Bench stating that,.“Indulgence has the propensity to give rise to procrastination which can be murder of Justice”..The request for an early hearing was also rejected by the Bench. The matter will now be taken on September 11.
The hearing in SEBI-Sahara case witnessed a very interesting episode today as Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi expressed his displeasure (in strong words) about certain queries by Justice Ranjan Gogoi..Rohatgi, who is appearing for Sahara Housing, was asked by Gogoi J. whom he was representing in the matter. Rohatgi’s reply “one of the Group companies” did not satisfy Gogoi J. who proceeded to ask the Advocate-on-Record to make it clear which company Rohatgi was representing..An agitated Rohatgi made his dissatisfaction evident stating,.“This is not the way Court should doubt the counsel and who he is appearing for. I’m sorry your lordships.”.Rohatgi refrained from making any further arguments while also remarking to the AoR that he will not appear [in the matter] again..Meanwhile, Court today ordered Sahara to deposit Rs. 1500 crore by September 7. Request for extension of time for payment was turned down by the Bench with the Bench stating that,.“Indulgence has the propensity to give rise to procrastination which can be murder of Justice”..The request for an early hearing was also rejected by the Bench. The matter will now be taken on September 11.