Dismissed
Bhaskar v. Dist.Judge,Khurda
Orissa HCOJC/1679/1998
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 1998 13.8.2015 Lawyers have abstained…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
O.J.C. No.1679 of 1998
13.8.2015
Lawyers have abstained from the Court work due to resolution passed by the Hig
h Court Bar Association.
None appears.
On 30.7.2015, 3.8.2015 and 10.8.2015 also none appeared.
Perused the contents of the writ application.
Challenge is made to the order dated 29.1.1998 passed by the learned District
Judge, Khurda, Bhubaneswar in Civil Revision No.44 of 1997 dismissing the same and thereby con
firming the order dated 29.7.1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Bhubaneswar
in M.C.No.285 of 1997, whereby and whereunder, the learned trial court issued notice to the d
efendant-opposite party in an application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 read with Sec.151 C.P.C
. The interim order arises out of title suit no.364 of 1997 on the file of the learned Civil
Judge (Sr.Division), Bhubaneswar.
The Registry has ascertained that the aforesaid suit was transferred to the le
arned 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar and decreed on 19.6.2015.
In view of the same, by efflux of time, the writ application has become infruc
tuous.
Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed as infructuous.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ challenge to the interim injunction order is maintainable in light of the suit having been decreed.
Whether the writ petition has become infructuous due to the decree passed in the underlying suit.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Unknown Judge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court