Disposed

Nirakara Sabato v. Gangadhar Padhi

Orissa HC13 Jan 2016FAO/182/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This full appeal was disposed of without deciding merits. The High Court directed the trial court to dispose of the underlying suit expeditiously regarding possession. It ordered maintenance of status quo for over nine years. Misc. Case No. 15 of 2007 was noted to be decided separately.

What did the court decide?

Suit directed to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible by the lower court; status quo in possession maintained.

Nirakara Sabato Vs Gangadhar Padhi — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

 F.A.O. No. 182 of 2006

¶2

 13.01Heard .2016

¶3

2. This appeal has been filed assailing order dated 25.04.2006 passed by the learned Civi
l Judge (Senior Division), Berhampur in I.A. No.11/05 arising out of C.S. No.267 of 2005 dismi
ssing an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC.

¶4

3. Earlier, learned Trial Court in exercise of power under Order 39 Rule 3, CPC had grant
ed ad-interim order of injunction, which was vacated pursuant to passing of the impugned order
. The suit has been filed for declaration. While issuing notice in the matter on 18.05.2006, t
his Court directed the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the possession over the s
uit property, which is continuing till date and since then, more than nine years have lapsed.
In that view of the matter, this Court feels that interest of justice would serve better if th
e suit is directed to be disposed of finally.

¶5

4. Therefore, this Court directs that the suit be disposed of as expeditiously as possibl
e and the parties are directed to cooperate with the learned Court below for disposal of the s
uit. Till disposal of the suit, status quo in respect of possession of the suit property shall
 be maintained by the parties. It is made clear that no order is being passed in Misc. Case No
.15 of 2007, which has been filed under Order 39 Rule 2-A, CPC, which may be considered separa
tely.

¶6

 With the aforesaid observation and direction, the appeal stands disposed of.

¶7

 Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.

¶8

 K.R.Mohapatra,

¶9

J.

Nirakara Sabato v. Gangadhar Padhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirakara Sabato v. Gangadhar Padhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

L.a.Collector Vs Debendra Ku.Das

Pradeep Agarwal Vs Ajay Ku.Goyal

Land Acquisition Collector Vs Bhagarathi Mali

Sk.Usman Vs Zarina Begum

Nilap Jagabandhu Vs Satyasahi Edun.C.Tru

Rabindra Kumar Das Vs Chandramani Das