Skip to main content

CAVEAT ORIGINAL SIDE HIGH COURT

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               CAVEAT NO.                 of 2015

 

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

TESTAMENTARY INTESTATE JURISDICTION

ORIGINAL SIDE

 

In the Matter of:

An application under Section 148A of the Code of Civil Procedure;

    

And

 

In the Matter of:       

Manju Bhattacharya, wife of Sri Pradip Kumar Bhattacharya of 5-E, Jubilee Park, P. S. Jadavpur, Kolkata 700 033, District South 24-Parganas

                                     …               Caveator

 

VERSUS

 

Ajeya Kumar Upadhyay, son of Late Hari Vansh Upadhyay of Flat No. 3-D/5, Aasha Co-operative Housing Society Limited, 93, Deshpran Sashmal Road, P. S. Tollygunge, Kolkata 700 033, District South 24-Parganas

 

                     ……. Opposite Parties

 

 

To

The Registrar,

High Court, Original Side,

Calcutta – 700001.

 

Dear Sir,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

                Let nothing be done in any application for injunction and/or Stay respect of the above suit together with particulars of which are give below without prior notice to us as the Advocate on record of the said Caveateor.

 

                 Dated this           day of March 2015.

 

 

                                                                                      Yours faithfully,

                                                         

                                                                                               Advocate.

 

 

 

PARTICULARS

 

 

1.

 

2.

 

 

 

3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

 

 

 

5.

 

 

 

 

6.

 

 

 

 

7.

 

 

 

Name of the Caveator.

 

Address of the Caveator.

 

 

 

In case of Caveators residing outside the jurisdiction of this Court address of the Caveators for service of Notice within the jurisdiction of this Court.

 

 

Name of the Applicant in respect of application against which caveator.

 

Address of the applicants.

 

 

 

 

Nature of suit/proceeding out of which the proceeding may be initiated

 

Name of the Advocate of the Caveator whom the notice to be served.

 

 

Manju Bhattacharya

 

5-E, Jubilee Park, P. S. Jadavpur, Kolkata 700 033, District South 24-Parganas

 

Sandip Roy Choudhury, Advocate, High Court, Calcutta, Bar Association, Room No. 2 (In front of Court Room No. 12) and also at C/o Chhabi Sen, Supreme Law Chamber, Ground Floor, Room No. 3, 6, K. S. Roy Road, Kolkata 700 001

 

Ajeya Kumar Upadhyay

 

 

 

Aasha Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Flat No. 3-D/5, 93, Despran Sashmal Road, P. S. Tollygunge, Kolkata 700 033, District South 24-Parganas

 

In connection with any PLA application in This Hon’ble Court

 

Sandip Roy Choudhury, Advocate, High Court, Calcutta, Bar Association, Room No. 2 (In front of Court Room No. 12) and also at C/o Chhabi Sen, Supreme Law Chamber, Ground Floor, Room No. 3, 6, K. S. Roy Road, Kolkata 700 001

 

 

Caveat No.                 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

TESTAMENTARY INTESTATE JURISDICTION

ORIGINAL SIDE

 

 

In the Matter of:

An application under Section 148A of the Code of Civil Procedure;

And

In the Matter of:

Manju Bhattacharya

…….    CAVEATOR

Versus

Ajeya Kumar Upadhyay …… OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

 

 

 

 

C A V E A T

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sandip Roy Choudhury, Advocate, High Court, Calcutta, Bar Association, Room No. 2 (In front of Court Room No. 12) and also at C/o Chhabi Sen, Supreme Law Chamber, Ground Floor, Room No. 3, 6, K. S. Roy Road, Kolkata 700 001

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

OBJECTIONS OF RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER

  OBJECTIONS OF 2ND TO 4TH RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER:- 1. The interim application is not maintainable since the affidavit accompanied the application does not speaks truth and its vague and not specific in disclosing accurate reasons for the absence of petitioner/plaintiff in the days wherein court has scheduled to plaintiff evidence. 2. The affidavit consist of mere allegations un-supported by documents, hence liable to be dismissed. The written statement and objections filed by these respondents to the main petition be read as part and parcel of this objections to delay condonation application. 3. The matter of condonation of delay, it is an established position that every day's delay has to be explained and a person who seeks the exercise of the discretion to condone the delay in his favour cannot run away by making a mere general statement or mere allegation unsupported by document or mere passing of his laches upon his advocate. 4...
Post a Comment
Read more

"As Is" and "As Available"

  " As Is" and "As Available " " As available " applies to goods and services, including those provided online. ... With apps and websites, " As Available " indicates contractual standards only when the product or service is available. “As Is” alerts a buyer in a sales contract that they accept the purchased item, be it real estate, animals, automobiles or appliances, in its present condition. It also assumes the buyer has a right to inspect the property first so they can assess any defects and make an informed decision. “As available” applies to goods and services, including those provided online. At its most simple definition, it refers to products in stock or real estate that remain on the market. Once purchased, there are no guarantees because the product is no longer available. It also refers to store or office hours with a bricks-and-mortar business. With apps and websites, “As Available” indicates contractual standards only when the produc...
Post a Comment
Read more

Quashing a False 498a FIR

  Quashing a False 498a FIR Quashing of FIR is a tough matter ! Courts generally are reluctant to interfere at the stage of investigation and only very strong grounds + persuasive arguments can make a bench sit up and taking a 482 matter seriously. FIR’s can be quashed if they an abuse of process of law/prima facie don’t disclose any offence or are inherently improbable - If you are thinking about quashing of FIR u/s 498a/406. These are the grounds/list of judgments of quashing that would help bolster your plea : GROUNDS FOR QUASHING IN A 498a/406/34 IPC MATTER • BECAUSE  Section 482 of the Cr.PC  categorically saves the inherent power of High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case it is pertinent in the ends of justice and to prevent an abuse of the process of law that the impugned FIR be quashed. • BECAUSE ...
Post a Comment
Read more