Avik Sarkar v. Meheli Sarkar (Das )

Item29-07-2025 4.

FA 223 of 2022 Ct. 16 sg Avik Sarkar

Versus

Meheli Sarkar (Das)

1. The appellant is not represented. The advocate-on-record of the appellant is also not present.

2. An oral prayer for adjournment is made by the junior to Mr. Partha Pratim Ray, Advocate. Even on the earlier occasion, the appellant was not present. Mr. Sudip Sarkar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant previously.

3. We do not find any reason for absence of the learned advocate-on-record or any other counsel appointed on behalf of the appellant.

4. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed for default. (Soumen Sen, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)