Disposed

Sanjib Kumar Nayak v. Lingaraj Sahoo

Orissa HC15 Jul 2021CMP/129/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Civil Miscellaneous Petition cross-memorandum, the petitioner sought directions for early disposal of a suit for permanent injunction pending at Bhubaneswar. The High Court found the trial court's proceedings casual and directed it to take coercive measures to expedite the matter.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar, to take coercive measures to make the matter ready for hearing and dispose of it early.

Sanjib Kumar Nayak Vs Lingaraj Sahoo — Execution and Attachment | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

C.M.P. No.129 OF 2021

¶3

Sanjib Kumar Nayak

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Suvashish Pattanaik, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Lingaraj Sahoo and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

15.07.2021

This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

¶16

The Petitioner in this CMP prays for a direction for early disposal of C.S. No.534 of 2013 pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar.

¶17

Mr. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the suit has been filed for a decree of permanent injunction simplicitor. On an application filed under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., order of temporary injunction has been granted in favour of the plaintiff-Opposite Party No.1. As such, the Petitioner, who is defendant No.7 and is a bona fide purchaser of a portion of the suit property is prevented from enjoying the same. It is his submission that the learned trial court is casually adjourning the matter for which the notice on defendant Nos.4 and 6 have not yet been made sufficient. Lastly, on 3^rd October, 2020, the matter was posted for taking steps for filing of requisites for fresh notice on defendant Nos.4 and 6. But, as yet the plaintiff has not taken any step for filing of requisites for

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

fresh notice on defendant Nos.4 and 6. It is his submission that in view of the above, the Petitioner, who is defendant No.7 is highly prejudiced and is suffering immensely.

¶21

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the case record, it apparent that the suit is not yet ready for hearing. Hence, it will not be proper to direct learned trial court for early disposal of the suit. However, it appears from the order sheet annexed to the CMP that learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar is dealing with the matter very casually and is not taking any serious steps to see that the suit becomes ready for hearing.

¶22

Accordingly, it is directed that learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar shall take steps in accordance with law if necessary, by taking coercive measure to see that the matter becomes ready for hearing early and thereafter takes step for early disposal of the suit.

¶23

With the aforesaid observation, this CMP is disposed of.

¶24

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25th March,2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No.4798 dated 15^th April, 2021.

¶25

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶26

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Sanjib Kumar Nayak v. Lingaraj Sahoo

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjib Kumar Nayak v. Lingaraj Sahoo

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

Jagannath Jagadeba R Vs State

Jagannath Jagadeba R Vs State

Parbati Moharana Vs Chandrasekhar Moharana @ Sikhar

Gopal Das Agrawal Vs Collector, Sundargarh

Rati Harijan@ Dhangadamajhi Vs State of Odisha

Kanhei Lal Patra Vs State of Odisha