Arpita Halder vs Kuntal Halder — 118/2024

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 128. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED IN DEFAULT on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Misc. Execution Case

CNR: WBND090014892024

Filing Number

1490/2024

Filing Date

20-Jun-2024

Registration No

118/2024

Registration Date

20-Jun-2024

Court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehatta

Judge

6-Acjm

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED IN DEFAULT

Last updated 04-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 128

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Arpita Halder

    Adv. KUNTAL BHATTACHARYYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Kuntal Halder

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The ACJM Tehatta court dismissed Misc Execution Case No. 118/2024 due to the petitioner's persistent absence and failure to file a show cause petition despite previous warnings and opportunities. The court found that the petitioner's non-appearance and inaction indicated unwillingness to proceed, warranting dismissal under procedural rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Acjm

  4. 27-Jan-2026

    Show Cause

    Acjm

  5. 03-Nov-2025

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  6. 28-Aug-2025

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  7. 16-Apr-2025

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  8. 04-Mar-2025

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  9. 27-Dec-2024

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  10. 18-Oct-2024

    Executionof W.A/Wpa

    Acjm

  11. 12-Sep-2024

    Payment

    Acjm

  12. 26-Jul-2024

    Payment

    Acjm

  13. 20-Jun-2024

    OrderView PDF

  14. 20-Jun-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  15. 20-Jun-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 118/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The ACJM Tehatta court dismissed Misc Execution Case No. 118/2024 due to the petitioner's persistent absence and failure to file a show cause petition despite previous warnings and opportunities. The court found that the petitioner's non-appearance and inaction indicated unwillingness to proceed, warranting dismissal under procedural rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case