The High Court dismissed a contempt petition challenging the Trial Court's allowance of a third-party intervention application. The Court held that villagers are proper parties to a suit for changing a school name as their children attend the institution.
The Contempt Petition stands dismissed.
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 CMP NO. 1016 OF 2022 1113 Subal Chandra Nayak and others .... Petitioners
Mr. Prakash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
…. Opp. Party Mr. B. Panigrahi, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opp. Party Nos.1 to 5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
Order No.
ORDER 23.11.2022
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
standi of the third party intervenors. Learned trial Court holding that the third party intervenors are proper parties to the suit and their presence will facilitate the Court for complete and effective adjudication of the suit allowed the same.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge
bks
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a third party application for intervention filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC in a suit for change of school name should be allowed.
Whether the villagers are proper parties since the children of the villagers pursue studies in the concerned school and Anganwadi Centre.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Subal Chandra Nayak and others
State of Odisha and others
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
