SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Cal) 276

AMITAVA LALA
BINAPANI DAS – Appellant
Versus
C. M. C. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
FAZLUL HAQUE, J.K.GUPTA, Jayanta Mitra, MONIKA GHOSH

AMITAVA LALA, J.

( 1 ) THIS review application is arising out of an order which was passed by this Court on 18th September, 2003. Such order was passed in presence of both the parties. In disposing of the writ I directed the matter to be heard by appellate authority on the basis of the submission of the Learned counsel appearing for the respondents. This review application arises on that score.

( 2 ) MR. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioner contended that the cause of action for filing of the writ petition before this court was for not giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by the hearing Officer. Therefore, the matter is to be heard by the Hearing Officer first. If the appellate authority is directed to hear out on the basis of the submission of the respondents, in that case, they will lose one of the valuable opportunities of hearing before the Hearing Officer. No notice was served upon the appropriate address of the petitioner so that she could not be present before the appropriate authority. Therefore, in absence of the petitioner an ex parte order was passed by the Hearing Officer.

( 3 ) MR. Barin Banerjee, Learned Counsel, appearin









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top