The Chief Justice dismissed a writ petition seeking delivery of possession of mortgaged property sold by an OPEC. The court declined to entertain it due to a pending second appeal on the same subject matter before the same court, avoiding multiplicity of litigation.
The prayer for delivery of possession of the mortgaged property was dismissed.
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.
W.P.(C). No. 18701 of 2013
03. 04.05.2016 Heard Mr. Dayanidhi Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitione
r.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he had taken loan from the opposite party-C
orporation which he was unable to repay. Hence, proceeding under Section 29 of the OSFC Act wa
s initiated and pursuant to the said proceeding, the property which was mortgaged has been sol
d to a third party.
2. Challenging the said sale, it is contended by the learned counsel for the peti
tioner that the petitioner filed a suit which was decreed. The same has also been confirmed in
appeal and against that order second appeal is pending consideration before this Court.
3. This writ petition has now been filed with a prayer to the opposite parties to
hand over the delivery of possession of the mortgaged property to the petitioner. Learned cou
nsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court that against the order of the appella
te court, second appeal has been filed before this Court which is pending and as such, enterta
ining this writ petition would amount to multiplicity of litigation for the same cause of acti
on. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant the prayer made in this petition which is accordin
gly dismissed.
.......
( VINEET SARAN )
CHIEF JUSTICE
....
( DR. B.R. SARANGI )
JUDGE
dm
-2-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain the writ petition for delivery of possession given a pending second appeal before the same court on the same cause of action.
Whether decreeing the present writ petition would amount to multiplicity of litigation.
Petitioner
Opposite Party Corporation
VINEET SARAN
DR. B.R. SARANGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court