Dismissed

Kanakeswar Baruah, v. the Union of India and Ors.

Gauhati HC24 Sept 2024MC/60/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed an application under Section 151 CPC for restoration of a writ petition. The court held that the application was rejected due to the non-appearance of the applicant's counsel, following the previous dismissal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Application for restoration of W.P.(C) no. 4488/2011 dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of counsel.

Kanakeswar Baruah, Vs the Union of India and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010170662024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : MC/60/2024

¶5

KANAKESWAR BARUAH, S/O LT. RUPAI BARUAH, R/O VILL KAKILA CHARIALI, P.O. KAKILA,P.S.GOHPUR, DIST SONITPUR, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE UNION OF INDIA and ORS

¶8

REP.BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL SASATRA SEEMA BAL EAST BLOCK-V R.K. PURAM NEW DELHI

¶10

3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

¶11

SSB EAST BLOCK R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110006

¶12

4:THE COMMANDANT

¶13

THE 18TH BATTALION SSB BIRPUR BIHAR

¶14

5:THE ASSTT. COMMANDANT

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

THE 18TH BATTALION SSB BIRPUR BIHAR

¶17

6:THE SUPDT.OF POLICE

¶18

BIRPUR DIST SAPUAL BIHAR

¶19

7:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF BIRPUR POLICE STATION

¶20

BIRPUR DIST SAPUAL BIHAR

¶21

8:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF BASOMOTIA POLICE STATION

¶22

ARARIA BIHA

¶23

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D GOGOI,

¶24

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. S S ROY (CGC)

¶25

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Date : 25-09-2024

¶28

None appears for the applicant when the matter is called.

¶29

Heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC appearing for respondent nos. 1-5.

¶30

This instant application has been filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for restoration of W.P.(C) no. 4488/2011, which was dismissed on 18.04.2022 for non-prosecution.

¶31

Mr. Roy, learned CGC appearing for respondent nos. 1 – 5 draws the

¶32

Page No.# 3/3

¶33

attention of this Court to the Order dated 09.11.2021 passed in W.P.(C) no. 4488/2011 on which date, in view of consecutive non-appearance on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶34

It is apt to reproduce the aforesaid order hereunder for ready reference :-

¶35

None appears for the petitioner on call. On last occasion also none appeared for the petitioner. Mr. S. S. Roy, learned Govt. Advocate is present.

¶36

The matter is dismissed for non prosecution.

¶37

Today also, when the matter is called, the engaged counsel on behalf of the applicant is absent. Considering the absence of the applicant’s counsel, the instant application stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Kanakeswar Baruah, v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanakeswar Baruah, v. the Union of India and 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

Md. Rafikul Islam Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Kandarpa Kumar Kalita Vs Uco Bank and 3 Ors.

C. Lalhmangaiha Vs State of Mizoram and 2 Ors.

Monmohan Gowala Vs P. Ashok Babu and Anr.

The State of Assam Vs Manoj Kumar Baruah

Pradip Mahanta Vs Ramendra Nath Sarma