MALAY BANERJEE Vs. ANTARA BANERJEE
LAWS(CAL)-2021-3-49
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on March 24,2021

MALAY BANERJEE Appellant
VERSUS
Antara Banerjee Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Suvra Ghosh, J. - (1.) The present appeal which is directed against judgment dated 29-07-2013 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Purulia in Matrimonial Suit No. 115 of 2007 is accompanied by an application under order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for production of additional evidence. A coordinate Bench, vide order dated 12-03-2014, directed that the application be heard along with the appeal.
(2.) Notice of appeal has been attempted to be served and was returned with a postal endorsement "refused". In this regard it shall be useful to reproduce order dated 24-02-2021:- "Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant. He submits, the application is for production of additional evidence. There was direction earlier made by a coordinate Bench on 12th March, 2014 for the application to come up for hearing along with the appeal. He submits, notice of appeal has been served and all formalities complied with. Respondent goes unrepresented. We find a note, laid by the section before Registrar (Administration), saying, vide memo dated 7th April, 2015 notice of appeal was issued upon sole respondent by speed post with acknowledgment due but the same has been returned with postal endorsement on the envelope as "refuse". Affidavit-of-service in compliance with direction made by another coordinate Bench on 7th December, 2020 is filed. The affidavit contains postal article addressed to respondent bearing endorsement "refused".
(3.) We are convinced that the respondent is not interested in contesting the appeal. The appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.