The appeal was dismissed for default as the appellant failed to participate in mediation and refused to appear before the mediator, indicating lack of interest 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.
33 03.4.2023 FAT 109 of 2018 with Ct-08 I.A No. CAN 2 of 2019(Old CAN No. 8173 of 2019) CAN 3 of 2021 CAN 4 of 2022
ar
Smt. Mallika Mandal Vs. Dakshina Ranjan Mandal
Mr. Anirban Bose
Mr. Satyajit Senapati
… For the Respondent/Husband
The appellant is not represented even in the second call.
The matter was earlier sent to mediation on the oral prayer of the parties.
It appears from the final report of the Mediator that the appellant did not participate in the mediation on 12th October, 2022, in fact, she refused to appear before the learned Mediator. The appellant was also not represented on 30th October, 2022.
From the aforesaid it appears that the appellant is not interested to proceed with the appeal.
The appeal stands accordingly dismissed for default.
Interim order stands vacated.
In view of dismissal of the appeal all connected applications being CAN 8173 of 2019, CAN 3 of 201 and CAN 4 of 2022 are also dismissed.
(Uday Kumar, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
2
Smt. Mallika Mandal
Dakshina Ranjan Mandal
Uday Kumar
Soumen Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
