Order No: 2                                                                             Date:05/06/2023

Ld. Advocate of petitioner/complainant is present. Ld. Advocate of O.p. nos.4 & 5 is present and file a petition praying for time on the ground stated therein. None appears on behalf of other O.ps. The prayer for adjournment of O.p. nos.4 & 5 is heard, considered and rejected.

Today is fixed for hearing of the M.A. case No.60/2023. Ld. Advocate of petitioner/complainant is ready for hearing of the M.A. case. The fact remains is that when instant .Complaint case is filed by complainant the said O.p. no.1 viz. Sima Ghosh had already expired but the complainant had no knowledge at the time of filing of the instant of the C.C. case. After that when the Ld. Advocate for O.p. nos.2 & 3 appeared for contesting the case Ld. Advocate of the complainant come to know the incident of the death of the O.p. no.1, Sima Ghosh. It appears from the cvase record that O.p. nos.2 & 3 are the legal heirs of O.p. no.1 and they are already in record in the instant complaint case as O.p. nos.2 & 3. Therefore it is required to expunge the O.p. no.1 from the cause-title of the complaint case. Accordingly we do it.

Thus, with that observation the instant M.A. case is disposed off.

Dictated & corrected by me.

Presiding Member/Member