Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4909 (GAU)

SMT. AMMEBALA ROY and ANR, v. SMT. CHANDANA DEVI,

RSA/100/2011 · 2026-02-25

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010005692011 2026:GAU-AS:2976 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RSA/100/2011 SMT. AMMEBALA ROY and ANR, W/O LATE BIRENDRA CH. RAY, R/O DEWRIPARA BONGAIGAON, P.O. BARPARA, P.S. and DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM. 2: BIDYUT ROY S/O LATE BIRENDRA CH. RAY R/O DEWRIPARA BONGAIGAON P.O. BARPARA P.S. and DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM VERSUS SMT. CHANDANA DEVI, W/O LATE LOKENDRA NARAYAN DEB, R/O ABHAYAPURI RAJBARI ABHAYAPURI TOWN, P.O. and P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S B PRASAD, MR.D DEY,MR.B C DAS Advocate for the Respondent : MS.L SHARMA, MR.S S SHARMA,FOR CAVEATOR,MR.S DEY,MR.B J MUKHERJEE,MRSS DEY,MS.J PAUL,MR.P SEN Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 26.02.2026 None appears for the appellants, although the names of the learned counsels are shown in the Cause List. The respondent is represented by Ms. J. Paul, learned counsel. On the previous date also, i.e., 19.02.2026, none had appeared for the appellants, although respondent was represented by learned counsel and the names of the learned counsel for the appellants were shown in the Cause List on that day as well. Therefore, it appears that the appellants are not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the case is dismissed for non-prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant