Umeshlal Pradhan v. Vijendra Pradhan And ANR

JPD.8 .

July 29, 2025. CALCUTTA HIGH COURT MNS.

In The Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side CO No. 228 of 2024 Umeshlal Pradhan Vs.

Vijendra Pradhan and another Mr. Kunaljit Bhattahcarjee, Ms. Suman Sehanabish ... for the opposite parties.

1. As per previous direction of the Court, learned counsel for the opposite parties files an affidavit-of-service indicating that e-mail service has been effected on the petitioner notifying the pendency of the matter.

2. The affidavit-of-service filed today be kept on record.

3. Despite service of notice, however, none appears for the petitioner.

4. It transpires that on two earlier occasions, that is, on July 21, 2025 and July 23, 2025, although the opposite parties were represented by counsel, none appeared to move the revisional application.

5. Even today, despite service, none appears for the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Court has no other option but to dismiss the revisional application for default.

7. Hence, CO No. 228 of 2024 is dismissed for default.

8. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

9. There will be no order as to costs.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)