Disposed

Sarojini Bhuyan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 Nov 2023CMP/949/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of contempt petition against trial court's judicial delay in hearing interim application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC. Court directed trial court to dispose matter within fifteen days.

What did the court decide?

High Court directed trial court to dispose interim application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC within fifteen days of producing certified copy of order.

Sarojini Bhuyan Vs State of Odisha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CU TTACK Date: 14-Nov-2023 11:06:40

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

CMP No. 949 of 2023

¶5

Sarojini Bhuyan

¶6

…. Petitioner

¶7

Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate being assisted by Miss Susrita Sahoo, Advocate

¶8

-versus-

¶9

State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties

¶10

Mr. Debendra Kumar Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opposite Party No.1)

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

13.11.2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶18

Order dated 8^th February, 2022 (Annexure-4) passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar in IA No.1 of 2022 (arising out of CS No.63 of 2022) is under challenge in this CMP, whereby an application under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC has been rejected.

¶19

Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that taking advantage of rejection of the petition under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC, Opposite Parties are intermittently making attempt to demolish the structure of the Petitioner situated over the suit land. In fact, they have demolished a portion of the suit house. The IA is ready for hearing as both the opposite parties have already entered appearance in the meantime and have filed their respective objections. Hence, he submits the petition under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC should be disposed of at the earliest and in the meantime, the parties should be directed to maintain status quo over the suit property.

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

// 2 //

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CU TTACK Date: 14-Nov-2023 11:06:40

¶24

Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC submits that he has no instruction in the matter. If the petition is ready for hearing, it should be disposed of at an early date giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶25

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears from order dated 5^th April, 2022 passed by learned trial Court that parties to the IA have already entered appearance. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that objections by both the parties have already been filed and the IA is ready for hearing. It appears that the impugned order was passed on 8^th February, 2022 and in the meantime, more than one year nine months have already elapsed. Hence, learned trial Court should make its best endeavour to see that the petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC in IA No.1 of 2022 is disposed of at the earliest.

¶26

Since the matter is ready for hearing, this Court disposes of the CMP with a direction that learned trial Court should make the best endravour to see that the IA is disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of fifteen days of production of certified copy of this order giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. If for any reason, the petition could not be disposed of within the time stipulated above, it shall be disposed of within seven days thereafter and not beyond that, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶27

The CMP is accordingly disposed of.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application, if any, in course of the day.

¶29

s.s.satapathy

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Sarojini Bhuyan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarojini Bhuyan v. State of Odisha

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

Sk. Sultan Vs State of Odisha

Tapan Kumar Behuria Vs Sukanta Kumar Sahu

Mamata Pattnayak Vs State of Odisha

Santosh Kumar Biswal Vs Gadadhar Biswal

Arun Parida Vs Maheswar Das

Ankita Agarwal Vs Sudarshan Karnany