Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shri Sanjib Sarkar vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 676 Cal

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 676 Cal
Judgement Date : 20 January, 2023

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shri Sanjib Sarkar vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 January, 2023

20.01.2023 (D/L-23-24) Ct.-18 (Susanta)

R.V.W. 20 of 2021 With I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2021 In C.O. 178 of 2016

Shri Sanjib Sarkar

-Vs-

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Amitava Mukherjee, Ms. Arpita Saha, Ms. Ankita Ghosh, .... For the petitioner.

Ms. Nandini Mitra, Mr. Sanjay Saha, .... For the O.P No. 4.

Ms. Tanuka Basu, .... For the O.P No.5.

Re: I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2021

The revisional application was disposed of by the

judgment and order dated March 02, 2020.

This is an application for condonation of delay in

seeking review of the aforesaid judgment and order.

Mrs. Nandini Mitra, learned advocate for the opposite

party no. 4 does not oppose the prayer of the petitioner, the

said delay, therefore is condoned, consequently, I.A. No.

CAN 1 of 2021 is allowed without any order as to costs.

Re: R.V.W. 20 of 2021

The opposite party no. 4 was arrayed as one of the

defendants in the suit out of which the revisional application

arose.

The learned Trial Judge by the order impugned

expunged the name of the said opposite party from the

cause-title of the said suit.

This Court, by the judgment and order under review,

affirmed the said order of the learned Trial Judge.

The opposite party no. 4, under an agreement, engaged

the opposite party no. 5 to execute the works of excavation

and desilting of the Mandarmoni Canal. The opposite party

no. 5, in turn, engaged the petitioner to execute the said

works.

The petitioner in the suit, is complaining that the

opposite party no. 5 did not pay his dues.

There is no privity of contract between the petitioner

and the opposite party no. 4 as such, the said opposite party

is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the suit but can,

at best, be a witness in the suit.

This Court, therefore, does not find any reason to

review its judgment and order dated March 02, 2020.

The review application being R.V.W. 20 of 2021 is

disposed of with the above observation without any order as

to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all

requisite formalities.

(Biswajit Basu, J.)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter