Interim order directing service of contempt application on alleged contemnor, appearance of State advocate, and filing of compliance report regarding an earlier order.
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.
1733 & 1734 (ML) 24.01.2025 kaushik
C.P.A.N. 1749 of 2024
in
WPA 3442 of 2020
Paresh Chandra Sardar Vs. Debabrata Paul
Ms. Senjuti Sengupta Mr. R. Guha Thakurta Mr. Pulin Chandra Maity … for the applicant.
Ms. Amrita Pandey … for the Delta Limited.
Mr. Bipin Ghosh … for the alleged contemnor.
Having heard Ms. Sengupta, learned advocate
appearing in support of the contempt application, I direct service of the contempt application on the alleged contemnor.
None appears on behalf of alleged contemnor.
Mr. Bipin Ghosh, learned advocate, who is present
in Court, usually appears on behalf of the State, is directed to appear in this matter and a copy of the contempt application be served upon Mr. Ghosh by the learned advocate for the applicant. Let his appointment be regularized.
The alleged contemnor is directed to file a report indicating whether the order dated 13th December, 2023 has been complied with or not.
2
Let this matter be taken up for further
consideration in the Monthly List of March, 2025 under the heading ‘Contempt Application’.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
Paresh Chandra Sardar
Delta Limited
Raja Basu Chowdhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
