Dismissed
Om Prakash Bajaj v. B.C. Bandyopadhyay
Calcutta HCCPAN/397/2003
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Item no.8 Subrata Bhattacharyya IN THE HIGH…
What the court decided
AI extract
Item no.8 Subrata Bhattacharyya IN THE HIGH…
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.
29-09-2022 Item no.8 Subrata Bhattacharyya
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction Appellate Side
CPAN No.397 of 2003 Sri Om Prakash Bajaj
-vs-
B.C. Bandyopadhyay arising out of WPA No.20397 of 1993
None …for the petitioner
To press the contempt application, none represents the petitioner.
The petitioner, by way of this contempt application under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 filed on February 26, 2003, sought for punishment of the alleged contemner/respondent concerned in the writ petition for non-compliance of an order dated February 26, 2002 passed by this court in CO No.20397(W) of 1993.
It appears that since filing of the contempt application, none moved to press it.
While the application was filed, the petitioner was aged about 43 years. Now, he is about 62 years old.
I feel that the petitioner is no longer interested to proceed with the application on hand.
Accordingly, the contempt application stands dismissed for non-appearance of the petitioner.
[Rabindranath Samanta, J]
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to take field on a contempt application for non-compliance of a previous order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Om Prakash Bajaj
B.C. Bandyopadhyay
Rabindranath Samanta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court