Back
Next 
2023 Supreme(Tri) 18
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Manindra Tripura - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 263 of 2021
Decided On : 16-01-2023
Important Points
The court recognized the necessity of adjournment due to the petitioner's death, emphasizing procedural integrity in ongoing legal matters.
Subject
Civil Law - Writ Petition
Headnote
(A) Writ Petitions - Issues relating to the status of parties - The court acknowledges the request for adjournment following the death of the petitioner. (Para 2)
(B) Court Procedure - Adjournments - A request for adjournment is granted, indicating the procedural considerations surrounding the status of a deceased party in legal proceedings. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The applicant has passed away, leading to the need for adjournment and rescheduling of the matter.
Findings of Court:
The court has allowed the adjournment and directed the matter to be listed for further consideration.
Issues: The primary issue revolves around the procedural implications of a party's death during pendency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court states that adjournment is a reasonable response to the death of a party involved in the proceedings.
Result: Matter to be listed again on 03.04.2023.
(B) Court Procedure - Adjournments - A request for adjournment is granted, indicating the procedural considerations surrounding the status of a deceased party in legal proceedings. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The applicant has passed away, leading to the need for adjournment and rescheduling of the matter.
Findings of Court:
The court has allowed the adjournment and directed the matter to be listed for further consideration.
Issues: The primary issue revolves around the procedural implications of a party's death during pendency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court states that adjournment is a reasonable response to the death of a party involved in the proceedings.
Result: Matter to be listed again on 03.04.2023.
Advocates appeared:
Kundan Pandey, Advocate, Raju Datta, Advocate, N Majumdar, Advocate
Kundan Pandey, Advocate, Raju Datta, Advocate, N Majumdar, Advocate
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner has expired, requiring adjournment. (Para 1) |
| 2. adjournment granted, matter to be listed later. (Para 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
Arindam Lodh, J. - Mr. Raju Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has sought for an adjournment for taking necessary steps since the petitioner has expired.
2. Prayer stands allowed.
3. List the matter on 03.04.2023.
