Paritosh Kumar Mondal v. Sri Kamal Ganguli
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CPAN No.1111 of 2000 Paritosh Kumar Mondal -vs- Sri Kamal Ganguli arising out of WPA No.9749 of 1997 None …for the petitioner To press the contempt application, none represents the petitioner. The petitioners, by way of this contempt application under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India dated June 23, 2000, sought punishment alleged contemner/respondent concerned in the writ petition for non-compliance of an order dated November 26, 1999 passed by this court in WP No.9749(W) of 1997. It appears that since filing of the contempt application, none moved to press it. I feel that the petitioner is no longer interested to proceed with the application on hand. Accordingly, the contempt application stands dismissed for non-appearance of the petitioner. [Rabindranath Samanta, J] 2
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.