Remanded

Binodini Sadual v. Ranjit Kumar Mohanty

Orissa HC5 Dec 2016CMP/1514/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge, in a contempt petition challenging the trial court's procedure in a suit pending since 1998, found that closing evidence without hearing defendants was inappropriate. The order dated 27.9.2016 was set aside, and the matter remanded to the trial court to proceed de novo with equal opportunity for both sides.

What did the court decide?

Set aside orders from 27.9.2016 and remitted matter to trial court to proceed from orders stage 20.7.2016 giving opportunity to both sides.

6. 05.12.2016 Heard Sri Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rath, l earned counsel appearing for the contesting opposite party no.1. Challenging the procedures adopted by the trial court in proceeding the matter i n C.S.No.65 of 1998 without giving opportunity to the defendants, this Court finds there is no dispute that in hearing both the sides in a disposed of matter, this Court has already direct ed the trial court to proceed in the hearing of the suits one after the other as expeditiou sly as possible and dispose of the same within six months from the date of receipt of the ord er.

Looking to the documents at Annexure-6, this Court finds the counsel for the def endants filed a memo indicating that he has no instruction from the defendants and it is on th e basis of the memo filed by the counsel for the defendants, it appears the trial court procee ded in the matter and closed the evidence of the plaintiff under the impression that the defen dants have no interest in the matter.

Considering that a civil dispute involved in the suit and right of the parties over the disputed land involved therein, this Court finds, the manner the matter has been clos ed against the defendants, is inappropriate. In the interest of justice and looking to the co ntest involved in the matter, the defendants should have been provided with another opportuni ty. For the interest of justice, this Court sets aside all the orders following order dated 27.9.2016 and remits the matter back to the trial court to take up the proceeding in C.S. No.6 5 of 1998 from the orders stage 20.7.2016 and proceed in the matter to decide it finally givin g opportunity of evidence and hearing to both the sides.

Since the order-sheet discloses that there has been already recording of evidenc e from the side of the plaintiff, the defendants will be given opportunity of cross examinatio n and also opportunity of evidence of their witness and the matter will be decided upon oppor tunity of hearing to both the sides.

As the suit is pending from 1998, this Court also directs the trial court to concl ude the same as expeditiously as possible provided there is no legal impediment otherwise. Lower court records be sent back to the trial court immediately. Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper application.

Binodini Sadual v. Ranjit Kumar Mohanty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binodini Sadual v. Ranjit Kumar Mohanty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sujata Mishra Vs Collector,Khurda

Amina Bibi Vs State and Ors.

Asharam Kuda Vs Consolidation Officr

Utkal Postal and R.M.S. Co.Op Society Vs Bipin Bihari Kar

Mahalaxmi Promotor and Developer Vs Tahasildar Cuttack Sadar

Jagabandhu Das Vs Election Officer, Tentulidihi Coop. Society