Sikkim High Court
WP(C)/43/2006 of Sandeep Poddar Vs Bandana Poddar on 15 December 2006
Order with Signature Office Note as toaction(ifany) Order Order taken on Order 0 15.12./ 6 The Petitioner, who is husband of the Respondent, has knocked the door of this Court under Article 227 of the ConstitutionofIndiaassailingvalidityoftheOrdersdated September 08 and 23, 2006 passed by the
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.
®
J'
Order with Signature
(ii) This Court cannot stay the instantproceedings in the absence of any Orderfrom a superior Court.[8]Mrs.LaxmiChakraborty, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitionercontended as following: -(i) The learned Judge has committedan error in observing that no document hasbeen furnished.(ii)Thelearned Judge has failed toconsider the effect of Section 10 of the C.P.C.and in the peculiar facts and circumstances,it ought to have stayed her hands./[9] Mr. N. Rai, learned counselappearing on behalf of the Respondent,contended that it is fact that no documentwas furnished by the Petitioner before theJudge, F`amily Court. In view of Section 21
Office Note as toaction (if any)taken on Order t, Order with Signature of the C.P.C. objection in regard to theinstant Suit at Gangtok shall have beentaken at the first instance and at the earliestopportunity and unless the Petitioner showsthat there has been consequent failure ofjustice, this writ petition is rit to be rejected.
[10] Mrs. L. Chakraborty, in reply,contended that as in the Family Courtlawyers are not permitted to appear,therefore, the Petitioner could not raise hisobjection earlier before the Gangtok Courtand its non raising of no consequence.
[11] The facts speak for themselves inrelation to the strange relationship betweenthe Petitioner and the Respondent. In orderto appreciate the differences, we alsoenquired from the wife yestj5day, who is alsopresent in Court today, We do not want to`
Office Note as toaction (if any)taken on Order