Writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn by the petitioner. The dispute involved a possible settlement order passed by a Permanent Lok Adalat where ambiguity existed regarding the opposite party’s claim.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.16730 OF 2021
DY Manager (Commerce) TPCODL …. Petitioners and others
Mr. Suresh Chandra Dash, Advocate
-versus-
Pramod Kumar Behera and another
…. Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
16.07.2021
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
jm
disposed of in the terms of possible settlement, but learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Cuttack added a sentence, which reads as follows:
“However the Ops may take into account the amount claim by them on 24.01.2020 against the Petitioner.’
It is his submission that in the meantime, the Opposite Party No.1 has already paid the entire dues and power supply has been restored pursuant to order under Annexure-6. As such, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the writ petition. Hence, the Petitioners want to withdraw the writ petition.
(K.R.Mohapatra) Judge
Page 2 of 2
DY Manager (Commerce) TPCODL and others
Pramod Kumar Behera and another
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
