A writ petition dismissed for default due to non-appearance does not decide questions of law or fact, has no precedential value on merits, and cannot be cited as authority. The order simply terminates the proceeding without adjudication.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/2227/2020 of Sathi Khurana Vs State of West Bengal & ORS |
| CNR | WBCHCA0060112020 |
| Date of Registration | 04-02-2020 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Precedent Value | No precedential value on merits; not binding |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Not binding as precedent; does not resolve any substantive issue |
| Persuasive For | Not persuasive on merits or substantive legal principles |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Dismissal for default, owing to absence of petitioner or counsel, does not decide any legal or factual issues.
- Such orders lack precedential effect—cannot be cited as authority on any legal question.
- Lawyers should ensure appearance in court to avoid default dismissal, which forecloses adjudication.
- No cost has been awarded in this instance for dismissal for default.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that no one appeared in support of the writ petition when the matter was called.
- Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed for default, with no order as to costs.
- The order contains no discussion of law, facts, or merits, and does not establish or clarify any legal principle.
Arguments by the Parties
No arguments are recorded in the judgment, as no appearance was made on behalf of the petitioner, and the matter was dismissed without hearing the parties.
Factual Background
- The writ petition was listed before the Calcutta High Court, but no one appeared in support of the writ petition when called.
- As a result, the petition was dismissed for default—meaning for non-prosecution or absence—without any order regarding costs.
- No further factual context or details are provided in the judgment.
Statutory Analysis
The judgment contains no discussion or interpretation of statutory provisions, as the matter was dismissed for non-appearance without adjudication.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are present in this order.
Procedural Innovations
The order follows standard procedure by dismissing the petition for default due to non-appearance; no new procedural precedent or innovation is recorded.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Routine application of procedural law; default dismissal does not change legal position.
Citations
- No citations are provided in the judgment.
- Order contained in WPA/2227/2020, Dated: 01-09-2025, Calcutta High Court.