Petitioner moved to quash an order dated 12.06.2016. Respondent argued the order was pursuant to this Court's writ direction. Bench held that since it involved a fresh cause of action, the miscellaneous case could not be entertained and dismissed it.
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.
WPC No. 4630 of 2016
Misc. Case No.10133 of 2016
30.06.2016
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This application has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to set aside/q
uash the order dated 12.06.2016 passed by opposite party no.5 on the ground that the petitione
r has not been given opportunity of hearing before passing the said order.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that order dated 12.06.2016
was passed by opposite party no.5 pursuant to the direction of this Court in the writ applica
tion.
In view of the above, since the prayer made in this misc. case relates to a fr
esh cause of action, this Court is not inclined to entertain the same in the misc. case.
The misc. case is accordingly dismissed.
S. Panda, J.
K.R. Mohapatra, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a miscellaneous case filed to set aside an order should be entertained when it relates to a fresh cause of action.
Petitioner
Opposite Party No. 5
S. Panda
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court