The High Court dismissed the revisional application for lack of prosecution after the petitioner submitted a written instruction not to proceed further.
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.
S/L 7 09.11.2022 Court No.652 SD
CO 2567 of 2019
Smt. Krishna Kundu Vs.
Smt. Rani Saha & Ors.
Mr. Avirup Mondal Mr. Sumitara Chakraborty
… for the Petitioner.
Mr. Rwitendra Banerjee Mr. Sourav Basu
… for the Opposite Parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to proceed further with the present revisional application and to that extent his client has sent a written instruction.
Accordingly, the revisional application is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Written instruction filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
Smt. Krishna Kundu
Smt. Rani Saha
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
