On the non-appearance of parties to a contempt application, the Court assumed lack of interest in proceeding. The Rule was discharged and the application was disposed of without any further order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
31 13.07.2021 Ct. No.23 pg.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE (Through Video Conference)
WPCRC 18022 of 2006 in WPA 2187 of 2004 Subhas Roy & Ors. Vs. Sukumar Das & Ors.
The contempt application was filed alleging violation of an order dated 11th July, 2005 passed in WP 2187 (W) of 2004. It appears that a Rule was issued on 7th July, 2006.
The matter appeared in the list on 7th July, 2021 and was called twice but no one appeared on behalf of the parties. Today the matter has been placed in the list marked as “Last Chance” with a note that appropriate orders will be passed if no one appears when the matter is taken up. None appears on behalf of any of the parties. No one has also applied for joining in the virtual mode.
In the facts and circumstances as aforesaid, it appears that none of the parties are interested in proceeding with the matter. The contempt application is disposed of without any further order.
The Rule stands discharged.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)
Subhas Roy & Ors.
Sukumar Das & Ors.
Arindam Mukherjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
