Gauhati High Court
CRP(IO)/52/2026 of THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, CHANGLANG Vs SMT. NIRMALA KURMI AND 4 ORS. on 17 March 2026
GAHC010034052026 2026:GAU-AS:3978 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/52/2026 THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, CHANGLANG RESIDENT OF P.O AND P.S- CHANGLANG, PIN- 792120, ARUNACHAL PRADESH VERSUS SMT. NIRMALA KURMI AND 4 ORS. WIFE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010034052026
2026:GAU-AS:3978
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/52/2026
THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, CHANGLANG
RESIDENT OF P.O AND P.S- CHANGLANG, PIN- 792120, ARUNACHAL
PRADESH
VERSUS
SMT. NIRMALA KURMI AND 4 ORS.
WIFE OF LATE DURGA KURMI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF GOPANAR
HABI GAON, P.O- MAMORANI, P.S- DIGBOI, DISTRICT- TINSUKIA, ASSAM
2:MISS LIPIKA KURMI
DAUGHTER OF LATE DURGA KURMI
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF GOPANAR HABI GAON
P.O- MAMORANI
P.S- DIGBOI
DISTRICT- TINSUKIA
ASSAM (BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1)
3:MISS PARISMITA KURMI
DAUGHTER OF LATE DURGA KURMI
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF GOPANAR HABI GAON
P.O- MAMORANI
P.S- DIGBOI
DISTRICT- TINSUKIA
ASSAM (BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1)
4:MISS SUSMITA KURMI
DAUGHTER OF LATE DURGA KURMI
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF GOPANAR HABI GAON
P.O- MAMORANI
P.S- DIGBOI
DISTRICT- TINSUKIA
Page No.# 2/2
ASSAM (BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1)
5:SMT. SANU KURMI
WIFE OF LATE SUTU KURMI
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF GOPANAR HABI GAON
P.O- MAMORANI
P.S- DIGBOI
DISTRICT- TINSUKIA
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M R ADHIKARI, Advocate for the Respondent : , B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
18.03.2026
None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite the names of the learned counsel being reflected in the cause-list and the matter being called twice.
2. In view of the above, the matter stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant