Allowed

Mr. M. K. Choudhury and 4 Ors. v. Smt. Manjula Nath and 11 Ors.

Gauhati HC20 Nov 2020I.A.(Civil)/565/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim application for withdrawal of the Vakalatnama by petitioners' counsel. The court found prerequisites fulfilled due to a registered notice sent to the client. Registry was directed to exclude the lawyers and issue fresh notices to the petitioners after four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The Interim Application for leave to withdraw Vakalatnama was allowed; registry directed to exclude counsel names and issue fresh notices.

Mr. M. K. Choudhury and 4 Ors. Vs Smt… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010026452019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/565/2019

¶5

MR. M. K. CHOUDHURY AND 4 ORS.

¶6

SENIOR ADVOCATE, GAUHATI HIGH COURT, GUWAHATI- 781001, DIST.KAMRUP (M), ASSAM

¶7

2: MR. T. N. SRINIVASAN

3: MR. N. BARUAH

4: MR. P. BHARADWAJ

5: MR. A. BARKATAK

VERSUS

SMT. MANJULA NATH and 11 ORS W/O- SRI RONJIT NATH R//O- VILL.- HOWLY, P.O.- HOWLY, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K CHOUDHURY

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶15

Linked Case : WP(C)/4232/2015

¶16

SMT. MANJULA NATH and 11 ORS

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Address:W/O SRI RONJIT NATH VILL. HOWLY P.O. HOWLY DIST- BARPETA ASSAM CENTRE NO.393 ROLL NO.032 HELPER VERSUS

¶19

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 172 ORS Address:REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6 ASSAM -----------Advocate for : MR. M K CHOUDHURY Advocate for : SC SOCIAL WELFARER1 appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 172 ORS: Advocate appearing for respectively.

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶21

ORDER

¶22

20-11-2020

¶23

The present I/A has been following the spirit of Order 3 Rule 4 of the CPC for granting leave to the present counsel for withdrawal of the Vakalatnama.

¶24

Shri P. Bharadwaj, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the notice dated 27.11.2018 send to the client by registered post with A/D. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the prerequirements of withdrawal of the vakalatnama are fulfilled and accordingly the I/A stands allowed.

¶25

Registry is directed not to further reflect the names of the present set of counsels.

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

The Registry may also issue fresh notices to the petitioners to enable them to make alternative arrangements, if so advised.

¶28

List this matter after 4(four) weeks with a fresh report from the Registry upon the notices to be issued to the petitioners.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Mr. M. K. Choudhury and 4 Ors. v. Smt. Manjula Nath and 11 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. M. K. Choudhury and 4 Ors. v. Smt. Manjula Nath and 11 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dibyalata Roy Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Shesh Kant Sharma Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Pankaj Kr. Baishya Vs Mridul Kr. Rabha and 6 Ors.

Kamal Das Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Abhijit Das Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Ms. Harmeit Kaur Vs the Assam Board of Revenue and 3 Ors.