Sajal Goswami v. Bijoy Kumar
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner in RPFAM No.05 of 2002 appeared unrepresented; order disposed of matter as no brief was available and no directions could be passed.
What did the court decide?
None. Order disposed of as petitioner did not appear and brief unavailable.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
RPFAM NO.05 OF 2002
Sajal Goswami …. Petitioner
None
-versus-
Bijoy Kumar …. Opp. Party
CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA ORDER
Order No. 04.08.2023
1. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. None appears for the Petitioner at the time of call.
3. Office note discloses that the brief is not available in the
section. Thus, the mater is placed for appropriate direction.
4. Since none appears to pursue the matter, no order, either
for reconstruction of the brief or otherwise, can be passed in this
case.
5. Accordingly, the RPFAM is disposed of.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
Rojalin
Signature Not Verified
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sajal Goswami
- respondent
Bijoy Kumar
Coram
K.R. Mohapatra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court