The High Court at Calcutta dismissed the contemnors' complaint filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 due to failure by the complainants to appear before the court to press the application after a prolonged period of inactivity.
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.
16-09-2022 Item no.12
Subrata Bhattacharyya
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction Appellate Side
CPAN No.974 of 2001 Dr. Byasdev Chatterjee & Anr. -vsSri Uday Kumar Mitra & Anr. arising out of WPA No.6954 of 2000
None …for the petitioners
To press the contempt application, none represents the petitioners.
The petitioners, by way of this contempt application under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India filed on July 16, 2001, sought for punishment of the alleged contemners/respondents concerned in the writ petition for non-compliance of an order dated September 25, 2000 passed by this court in WP No.6954(W) of 2000.
It appears that since filing of the contempt application, none moved to press it.
I feel that the petitioners are no longer interested to proceed with the application on hand.
Accordingly, the contempt application stands dismissed for non-appearance of the petitioners.
[Rabindranath Samanta, J]
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt application should be dismissed for non-appearance of the petitioners.
Dr. Byasdev Chatterjee & Anr.
Sri Uday Kumar Mitra & Anr.
Rabindranath Samanta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
