Disposed

Mahanta Behera v. Secretary,General Administration Dept

Orissa HC17 Aug 2022CMP/187/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner assailed an order rejecting his application for an injunction without notice against State functionaries. The High Court disposed of the compromise petition, directing service on the present Government Pleader and ordering expeditious hearing of the underlying interim application.

What did the court decide?

CMP disposed; observation made to serve application on Government Pleader and direct trial Court to decide within 15 days.

Mahanta Behera Vs Secretary,General… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CMP No. 187 of 2022

¶3

Mahanta Behera

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Sudhansu Sekhar Jena, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

…. Security, General Administration Opp. Parties Department, Government of Odisha and another

¶8

Mr. Dillip Kumar Mishra, Additional Government Advocate (For Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA ORDER 17.08.2022

¶11

Order No.

¶12

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶13

¶14

Petitioner in this CMP seeks to assail the order dated 14^th February, 2022 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar in I.A.No.1 of 2021 (arising out of C.S. No.2769 of 2021), whereby he rejected an application under Order XXXIX Rule 3 C.P.C. filed along with aforesaid interim application.

¶15

Mr. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that along with the plaint in C.S. No. 2769 of 2021, the Plaintiffs filed I.A. No.1 of 2021 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. As there was urgency in the matter, the Plaintiff also filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 3 C.P.C. to pass an ad interim order of injunction by dispensing with service of notice on the Defendants, who are functionaries of State. Learned trial Court without considering the urgency in the

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

matter, rejected the application under XXXIX Rule 3 C.P.C. vide order dated 14^th February, 2022 (Annexure-1). Hence, finding no order alternative, the Petitioner has moved this Court in the CMP.

¶19

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Opposite Parties submits that copy of the CMP has not yet been served on the State. Since the functionaries of the State are the Defendants in the suit, the Petitioner may move the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. by serving notice on the Defendants therein through alternate mode.

¶20

Taking into consideration the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the Defendants in the suit are the functionaries of the State and they are being represented by learned Government Pleader/Additional Government Pleader attached to the said Court.

¶21

In view of the above, this Court, without interfering with the order impugned herein, disposes of the CMP with an observation that in the event, the Petitioner serves a copy of the interim application along with the plaint on learned Government Pleader/Additional Government Pleader attached to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar to defend the case of the Defendants therein, the same shall be accepted. On service of the copy of the interim application along with plaint, the Defendants will file their objection to the IA within a period of fifteen days therefrom and in that event, learned trial Court shall do well to

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

consider the I.A.No.1 of 2021 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of fifteen days therefrom. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the Petitioner before learned trial Court.

¶25

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶26

(K.R. Mohapatra)

¶27

Judge

¶28

s.s.satapathy

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Mahanta Behera v. Secretary,General Administration Dept

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahanta Behera v. Secretary,General Administration Dept

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

Bhaskar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Qamar Sultana Vs State of Odisha

Chakradhara Sandha Vs Gadadhara Sandha

Ratikanta Dey Vs State of Odisha

Gopa Panda Vs Appellate Authority Cum Chairman, Rta, Cuttack

Susanta Kumar Mall Vs State of Odisha