Back
Next 
2023 Supreme(Tri) 28
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Prasenjit Das - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) 714 of 2022
Decided On : 03-02-2023
Important Points
The court ruled on expediting proceedings due to all parties present, emphasizing efficient case management and the need for timely justice.
Subject
Civil Law - Constitutional Law
Headnote
(A) Writ Petition for seeking relief under Article 226 of the Constitution - Immediate hearing directed in case involving the petitioner and respondents - The court admitted the petition and issued a rule while waiving the requirement for serving notice to respondents, given their prior appearance. (Paras 2-5)
(B) Procedural Law - The court directed the petitioner to file a rejoinder affidavit to ensure the continuation of proceedings in an orderly manner. (Paras 3-6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner seeks redressal via a writ petition against the State and associated parties. All parties have appeared, leading to the court waiving the usual notice period for the rule.
Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the presence of all parties and facilitated the continuation of hearing without unnecessary delays.
Issues: The core issues revolved around the necessity of expediting proceedings given the parties' readiness to proceed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of efficient case management and procedural adherence to avoid delays.
Result: Writ petition admitted and rule issued.
(B) Procedural Law - The court directed the petitioner to file a rejoinder affidavit to ensure the continuation of proceedings in an orderly manner. (Paras 3-6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner seeks redressal via a writ petition against the State and associated parties. All parties have appeared, leading to the court waiving the usual notice period for the rule.
Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the presence of all parties and facilitated the continuation of hearing without unnecessary delays.
Issues: The core issues revolved around the necessity of expediting proceedings given the parties' readiness to proceed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of efficient case management and procedural adherence to avoid delays.
Result: Writ petition admitted and rule issued.
Advocates appeared:
R. Purkayastha, Advocate, D. Bhattacharjee, Advocate, S. Saha, Advocate
R. Purkayastha, Advocate, D. Bhattacharjee, Advocate, S. Saha, Advocate
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. representation of parties in legal proceedings (Para 1) |
| 2. admittance of the case and issuance of rule (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. procedure for further hearings (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. requirement for filing rejoinder affidavit (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Ms. R. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned GA assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel for the respondents-State.
2. Admit.
3. Issue Rule.
4. Rule is waived since all the parties have already entered their appearance.
5. List the matter for hearing in its usual course.
6. In the meanwhile Ms. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner shall invariably file the rejoinder affidavit, as prayed for.
