Dismissed

Paradip Port Trust, Paradip v. Udayanath Rout

Orissa HC10 Nov 2021WP(C)/26922/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner requested interference with execution proceedings due to a pending money suit. The court directed the civil court to expedite the trial within three months and permitted production of reference records through summons or secondary evidence. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Expedited trial of suit within three months; records produced via summons or secondary evidence.

Paradip Port Trust, Paradip Vs Udayanath Rout — Execution and Attachment | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 26922 of 2021 (Through Hybrid Mode)

¶3

….. Petitioner Paradip Port Trust, Paradip Mr. G. Mishra, Senior Advocate for A. K. Dash, Advocate Vs. Udayanth Rout ….. Opposite Party

¶4

Mr. B. Pradhan, Advocate

¶5

CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA ORDER 10.11.2021

¶6

Order No. 02. 1. Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. His client seeks interference with the execution proceeding arising out of a reference culminating in award of money. While opposite party is award holder, his client had earlier instituted money suit, pending before Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kujanga. Direction for expeditious trial and disposal of said suit is required since his client is suffering peril of execution of award. The records in the reference are necessary to be produced as evidence in the suit. Position of his client is that having had a prior money claim, it is judgment debtor on award for money passed in a subsequent reference. His client’s contention that arbitration

¶7

Page 1 of 2

¶8

// 2 //

¶9

clause itself was deleted is no longer there for adjudication. 2. Mr. Pradhan, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party. He submits, order dated 16^th April, 2021 impugned in the writ petition is a good order. 3. Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kujanga wherein Money Suit no.1 of 2004 is pending (same parties case) is requested to expedite trial of the suit for early disposal. Court is given to understand that records of the reference are lying in the Court of District Judge, Cuttack. Setting aside award petition has since been disposed of and therefore execution. Petitioner requires these records to be produced as evidence in the suit. In the circumstances, the suit Court will deal with petitioner’s application regarding production of the records, either by issuance of summons or, if conditions are fulfilled, by permitting secondary evidence. Every endeavour should be made to dispose of the suit within period of three months from date of communication of this order. It is also expedited that parties will not seek unnecessary adjournments.

¶10

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶11

(Arindam Sinha) Judge

¶12

Prasant

¶13

Page 2 of 2

Paradip Port Trust, Paradip v. Udayanath Rout

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paradip Port Trust, Paradip v. Udayanath Rout

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rena@Runu Nayak Vs Namita Nayak

Md. Qaisar Iqbal Ali Vs State of Odisha

Raghunatha Palei Vs Principal Secy. Govt.of Odisha

Sanjay Keshari Mohapatra Vs State of Orissa

Manas Ranjan Sahoo Vs Ao, Union Bank of India, Asset Recovery Branch

Saktikanta Das Vs Cda, Cuttack