The court dismissed a contempt application for lack of material evidence showing a breach of undertaking to pay educational expenses. The petitioner failed to prove that the respondent shifted the son to a specific institution contrary to the undertaking.
The contempt application is dismissed for want of material evidence showing breach of undertaking.
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.
12.7.2024 SL No. 1 Ct No. 29 SB
CPAN 928 of 2023 In F.A. 16 of 2021 + CAN 3 of 2024
Tanima Ghosh (Chakraborty) Vs. Joydip Ghosh
Mr. Bidyut Kumar Halder Mr. Indranil Halder … for the petitioner.
Mr. Debabrata Ganguly Ms. Debaleena Ganguly … for the alleged contemnor
2
any independent proceeding for the maintenance of the son Debdip
Ghosh in accordance with law.
(Sugato Majumdar, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition discloses material evidence of breach of undertaking regarding educational expenses.
Whether the court can proceed with the contempt application given the absence of documentary proof of breach.
Tanima Ghosh (Chakraborty)
Joydip Ghosh
Sugato Majumdar
Soumen Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
