Adjournment order only. On learning that respondent nos. 1 and 6 died during the pendency of the appeal, the court adjourned the matter to enable the appellant's Advocate-on-Record to take necessary substitution steps; any such application is to be tagged with the pending applications. Decides nothing of general application.
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.
Item08-05-2025 21.
FAT 517 of 2013 CAN 5 of 2025 CAN 6 of 2025
sg
Mihir Kr. Ghosh
Ct. 8
Vs.
Prabir Kumar Ghosh & Ors.
Mr. Dilip Kumar Maiti Mr. Uttam Kumar Kamila …for the petitioner Mr. Kartick Kr. Bhattacharya Ms. Soumashree Dutta Ms. Papiya Naskar
…for the respondents
(Soumen Sen, J.)
(Smita Das De, J.)
Mihir Kr. Ghosh
Prabir Kumar Ghosh
Soumen Sen
Smita Das De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
