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

2021 Supreme(Gau) 91

KALYAN RAI SURANA
SAMIDUR RAHMAN S/O ANSER ALI SARKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. F.K.R. Ahmed, Mr. J. Uddin, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. N. Goswami, Govt. Advocate, Mr. B.D. Das, Senior Advocate, Ms. R. Deka

JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

Heard Mr. J. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent no.1 and Mr. B.D. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. R. Deka, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7. None appears on call the private respondent nos. 8 to 12.

2. On perusal of the record, it appears that there is no order accepting due service of notice on respondent nos. 8 and 12. From the steps taken, it appears that vide order dated 19.03.2018, the Court had allowed the petitioner to take steps for service of notice on respondent nos. 9 to 11 by dastimode through respondent no.6 and accordingly, as per affidavit filed on 09.05.2018, the petitioner projects that notice was served on respondent no.6 for onward service on respondent nos. 9 to 11. Thus, no order has been passed by the Court to accept due service of notice on respondent no. 8 and 12. Nonetheless, in view of the nature of judgment proposed to be passed, the Court has proceeded to deliver the judgment in the absence of the respon

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