In this
connection, we may also refer to the particulars mentioned
in para 9 of the judgment of the Division Bench in Archana
Guha v. Ranjit Guha Niyogil.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court
in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi [(1989) 2 CHN 252 (Cal)] in
which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite
and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence
therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi (1989 (II) CHN 252) in which one of us was a party (Banerjee,J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha vs.
Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.)
seem to be rather opposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our
concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha vs.
Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.)
seem to be rather opposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our
concurrence therewith.
In this context, the observations of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit Guha Neogi 1989 (II) CHN 252 in which one of us was a party (Banerjee, J.) seem to be rather apposite and we do lend credence to the same and thus record our concurrence therewith.