Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13532 (GAU)

DINDAYAL AGARWAL @ JALAN v. SMTI. RATNI DEVI JALAN and ANR

Cont.Cas(C)/552/2016 · 2025-09-14

Kardak Ete

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010118782016 2025:GAU-AS:12560 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/552/2016 DINDAYAL AGARWAL @ JALAN S/O LT. BHANIRAM AGARWAL, R/O H/NO.31, BENI KUNJ, KRISHNA NAGAR, CHATRIBARI ROAD, GHY-1, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS SMTI. RATNI DEVI JALAN and ANR W/O LT. CHOUTMAL JALAN, PROPRIETOR OF M/S ASHOK FLOUR MILLS, HEM BARUAH ROAD, FANCY BAZAR, GHY-1 2:SANWARMAL JALAN S/O LT. CHOUTMAL JALAN PROPRIETOR OF M/S ASHOK FLOUR MILLS HEM BARUAH ROAD FANCY BAZAR GHY- Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S CHOUDHURY, MR.S BANIK Advocate for the Respondent : MR.T C DAS, MR.P SARMA,MR.S KHAN,MR.O P BHATI Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 15.09.2025 Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly submits that during the pendency of this proceeding, the alleged contemnors have expired and in view of such developments, the petitioner would not like to press this petition. However, he submits that he may be granted liberty to avail appropriate remedy. Considering above, the contempt petition stands closed with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy as may be permissible under the law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant