The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a rejection of an application for permission to construct a house wall. The court held the writ petition was infructuous due to the lapse of time and disposed of it accordingly.
The writ petition is disposed of as infructuous due to the lapse of time.
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.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Aug-2023 10:16:54
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 21067 OF 2011
Mukta Senapati and another
…. Petitioners
Mr. Jamini Kanta Bhuyan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Chittaranjan Nanda, Advocate
-versus-
Ratnakar Senapati
…. Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
03.08.2023
(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge
ms
Page 1 of 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition applying for permission under Section 151 CPC is maintainable after time lapse.
Whether the writ petition has become infructuous.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukta Senapati
another
Ratnakar Senapati
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
