Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J
Smt. Radhika Dey – Appellant
Versus
Saira Banu and others – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. recall application as the basis of jurisdiction issue. (Para 1) |
| 2. improper service impacts jurisdiction and further proceedings. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. order allowing recall based on merit. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. merit addressed regarding modification of previous order. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's observations on compromise and necessity of all parties' consent. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. clarification of orders requires proper applications. (Para 11 , 17) |
| 7. jurisdictional error articulated regarding the scope of orders. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 8. judicial review justified due to procedural errors. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 9. outcome of the case and directions for further processes. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
1. CAN 1 of 2025 is an application for recall of an order dated July 21, 2025.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant argues that the applicant, who was one of the proforma opposite parties in the revisional application, was not served properly, which is borne out by the concerned postal track report annexed to the affidavit-of-service which had been filed on the relevant date by the revisionist petitioner, which indicates that, insofar as the present applicant is concerned, the item was delivered to t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
