Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Mr. Nirmal Kumar Chatterjee vs Sri Suman Howlader & Ors on 30 January, 2015
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen
1 30‐01‐2015 S.L. No 2.
ct.5/tkm.
WPCRC 476 (W) of 2014 in WP 27498 (W) of 2013 Mr. Nirmal Kumar Chatterjee Vs. Sri Suman Howlader & Ors.
Mr. B.N. Roy ....... For the applicant/petitioner Mr. Binay Panda ....... For the alleged contemnors The contemnors have filed their respective affidavits wherefrom it appears that an order was passed on 6th January 2015 to reconsider the application for mutation. Although it is a belated compliance of the order but having regard to the unconditional apology tendered on behalf of the contemnors, such apology is accepted.
Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although his client was present at the time of haring but the concerned authority did not disclose the documents as sought for and accordingly the petitioner could not make any effective representation. However this is not a matter which is required to be considered in this application. The record shows that the order has been passed after hearing the petitioner whether any document was asked for or not and 2 if there is any violation, the principles of natural justice cannot be gone into in this proceeding.
In view thereof, the contempt application is disposed of by recording compliance and the rule stands discharged. However, it is made clear that I have not gone into the merits of this matter.
(Soumen Sen, J.)