Meta Pixel
CNR: --
PENDING

KASHINATH GHARAMI vs GM., EASTERN RAILWAY

Case NumberOA (II u)/KOL/155/2022
Date of Filing9 Mar 2022
Case Type--
Last Hearing27 Jun 2023
State--
City--
Year of Filing2022

Party Details

Petitioner
  • KASHINATH GHARAMI
Respondent
  • GM.
  • EASTERN RAILWAY

Case Summary

KASHINATH GHARAMI filed Case No. OA (II u)/KOL/155/2022 in the Railway Claims Tribunal on 9 Mar 2022 against GM. and EASTERN RAILWAY. The case has undergone 8 hearings over 10 months. The case is currently pending. 1 order has been issued in this matter.

Hearing History (8)

  • 27JUN 2023
    FOR APPLICANTS EVIDENCE

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 24MAY 2023
    FOR APPLICANTS EVIDENCE

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 29MAR 2023
    FOR APPLICANTS EVIDENCE

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 8FEB 2023
    FOR FRAMING OF ISSUES

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 22DEC 2022
    FOR FILING WRITTEN STATEMENT

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 9NOV 2022
    FOR FILING WRITTEN STATEMENT

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • 22AUG 2022
    FOR FILING WRITTEN STATEMENT

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

  • FOR WRITTEN STATEMENT FILING

    Judge: ADDL. REGISTRAR

Orders (1)

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗

र॓ल दावा अिधकरण र॓ल दावा अिधकरण र॓ल दावा अिधकरण र॓ल दावा अिधकरण, कोलकाता यायपीठ कोलकाता यायपीठ RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Kolkata Bench ---------------- ORDER SHEET Nature of application ________________________Number _OA(IIu)/0155 Year___2022 Kashinath Gharami -Versus- GM/Eastern Railway Date Proceeding of the Bench Notes of the Registrar 11 ------------- 03.10.2023 Present : None for the applicant.

Shri B.

P.

Singh, Ld.

Counsel for the respondent.

Ld.

Counsel for the respondent submitted that since the applicant’s side has not turned up in several occasions, appropriate order may be passed.

On perusal of the record, it is seen that in earlier two consecutive occasions (24.05.2023 & 07.06.2023) neither the applicant nor the Ld.

Counsel for the applicant turned up to represent the case.

Today also neither the applicant nor his Lawyer has turned.

No evidence has been adduced till date.

Thus, from the above act of the applicant as well as of the Ld.

Counsel for the applicant, the Tribunal observed that there is no justification to drag the case unnecessarily.

Hence, O R D E R E D That the instant case is ‘dismissed for default’.

No order as to cost.

The instant case is disposed accordingly.

The file of papers be consigned to the Record Room.

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajeev Jain) (Sanjay Singh Gehlot) Member(Judicial) Vice-Chairman