High CourtsSingle Bench

Jagadamba Singh vs Pawan Kumar Tiwari & Ors

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 10 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 CAL CK 0303

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shivakant Prasad, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Second Appeal (SA) No. 98 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

22 paragraphs · 407 words

Shivakant Prasad, J

Respondent no.2 who happens to be mother of respondent no.1 is now being entered appearance through Mr. Gupta with Mr. Mitra, advocate-on-

record, who submits that notice of appeal was not given to the respondent no.2.

My attention is invited by Mr. Dhar, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, to the office report dated 03.07.2018 and 06.08.2018 which reflects

that the notice of appeal with the written notice for effecting of service was duly given on behalf of the appellant to be served upon the respondent

nos.1 and 2, and the same were issued on 06.07.2018.

It is also reflected from the notes of 06.08.2018 of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) that the postal notice upon the respondent nos.1 and 2 though

issued, neither any postal article nor any acknowledgement due card was received by the department. However, on the web-generated postal track

report, it was seen “item deliveredâ€. So, obviously respondent no.1 who happens to be son of the respondent no.2 entered appearance upon notice

of the appeal as per item delivery reflected from the track report.

It is also submitted by Mr. Dhar that the respondent no.2 never appeared before the Trial Court to depose, but all actions were taken by her son,

respondent no.1, who had deposed in the Trial Court on behalf of himself and his mother/respondent no.2.

Therefore, it cannot be said that notices are not served on the respondent no.2 and it signifies that the respondent no.2 must be aware through her son

about the proceeding of this appeal.

Be that as it may, since Mr. Gupta has entered appearance, an opportunity has to be given and in doing so, Mr. Dhar has agreed to provide him

photocopy of the paper-books at the cost of respondent no.2.

Thus, the situation is tide over and the matter stands over to 17.01.2020 for further argument.

It may be noted here that Mr. Kushal Chatterjee, learned advocate, had already appeared on behalf of the respondent no.1 and concluded his

argument, and it was directed him to submit written notice.

It is also pertinent to take note that written notes of argument was filed on behalf of the appellant and part of the written notes of argument enclosing

the reported decision have been filed this day in support of the contention made on behalf of the appellants in the matter.

So a copy of written notes of argument be supplied to the respondents.