The High Court at Calcutta dismissed a contempt application for non-appearance by the petitioner, finding him no longer interested in proceeding.
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.
19-09-2022 Item no.18 Subrata Bhattacharyya
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
CPAN No.942 of 2001 Amosh Kumar Bhakta
-vs-
Sri Sultan Singh & Anr. arising out of CO. No.12124(W) of 1996
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 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India filed on April 30, 2001, sought for punishment of the alleged contemners/respondents concerned in the writ petition for non-compliance of an order dated January 5, 2000 passed by this court in CO No.12124(W) of 1996.
It appears that since filing of the contempt application, none moved to press it.
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
Amosh Kumar Bhakta
Sri Sultan Singh & Anr.
Rabindranath Samanta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
