In a writ petition challenging the rejection of a petition under Order-1, Rule-10 CPC, the Bench held that the lower court correctly interpreted Section-2(11) of the CPC and found no infirmity in the order denying participation to the petitioner as a dependent.
The writ petition was dismissed as the impugned order was found to be without any infirmity.
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.9157 of 2020
Manjula Naik .……. Petitioner Mr. I. Palbabu, Adv. -Versus- Sanjay Kalia & others .……. Opposite Parties
Order No. 03.
CORAM:
JUSTICE C.R. DASH
ORDER
06.09.2021
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. Heard.
3. The present petitioner is the married sister-in-law of the
deceased, who died in a vehicular accident. She has filed this writ
petition against rejection of her petition filed before the learned 1 st
MACT, Mayuabhanj, Baripada under Order-1, Rule-10 CPC on the
ground that she, being, a dependant of her deceased sister-in-law, is
entitled to get compensation out of the award by the MACT.
having been rejected, vide order dated 22.08.2019, the present writ petition has been filed.
………………………….
(C.R. Dash)
JUDGE
Subha
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, as the married sister-in-law of the deceased who died in a vehicular accident, is entitled to participate in the compensation proceedings as a dependent under Order-1, Rule-10
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Manjula Naik
Sanjay Kalia & others
C.R. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
