SURESH KUMAR SARAWAGI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is submitted by learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners that during pendency of this revisional application, a decree has been passed against the Opposite Party no.2 and, therefore, it is necessary that all those documents may be incorporated by filing supplementary affidavit. Accordingly, it is prayed that liberty be given for accepting such supplementary affidavit. In the order dated December 09, 2025, liberty was not given to the petitioners as no such case was made out before this Court and no one appeared to represent the Opposite Parties.

(2.) Today, the learned advocates appeared on behalf of the State and received advance copy of the said supplementary affidavit. Therefore, liberty is given to the petitioners to file the supplementary affidavit. Let the same be taken on record.

(3.) Affidavit-of-Service filed in Court today is taken on record. From the Affidavit-of-Service, it appears that the intimation was given on December 17, 2025. In spite of service, none appears to represent the Opposite Party no.2.