Dismissed¶20

Biswarupa Padhi v. Simanchal Maharana

Civil Procedure – Maintainability

Orissa HC18 Jun 2024CMP/321/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CMP No.321 of 2024, Orissa High Court, K.R. Mohapatra J., 18.06.2024 — maintainability of Order XL Rule 1 CPC application pending Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC interim order; status quo order confirmed in FAO No.15 of 2014; appellate refusal upheld; expeditious disposal of CS No.47 of 2014 directed; Petitioner Biswarupa Padhi v. Simanchal Maharana; counsel S.S. Rao Sr. Adv. with A.A. Mishra.

What did the court decide?

CMP dismissed (no interference with Annexure-6); direction to the learned trial Court to endeavour early disposal of the suit in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment; urgent certified copy on proper application. ¶20

Biswarupa Padhi Vs Simanchal Maharana — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 19-Jun-2024 12:10:46

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

CMP NO.321 OF 2024 Biswarupa Padhi

¶5

…. Petitioner

¶6

Mr. S.S. Rao Senior Advocate being assisted by Mr. A.A. Mishra, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

Simanchal Maharana …. Opp. Parties

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA ORDER

Order No.

18.06.2024

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Order dated 31^st July, 2023 (Annexure-6) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Aska in FAO No.01 of 2023 is under challenge in this CMP, whereby setting aside the order dated 13^th December, 2022 (Annexure-5) passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aska in IA No.19 of 2016 (arising out of CS No.47 of 2014) learned Appellate Court refused the prayer made by the Plaintiff-Petitioner under Order XL Rule 1 CPC.

¶16

In course of hearing, it appears that during pendency of the suit, learned trial Court vide order dated 12^th November, 2014 passed an order of status quo in IA No.08 of 2014 in an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC. The said order was confirmed vide order dated 26^th September, 2015 (Annexure-4) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Aska in FAO No.15 of 2014. Thus, an application under Order XL Rule 1 CPC during continuance of an interim order passed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC is not maintainable, as rightly held by learned Additional District Judge, Aska in the impugned order under Annexure-6.

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 19-Jun-2024 12:10:46

¶20

In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order under Annexure-6.

¶21

At this stage, Mr. Rao, learned Senior Advocate submits that since the suit is of the year, 2014, all attempts should be made for early disposal of the same.

¶22

In view of such submission, this Court while disposing of this CMP, directs that learned trial Court should make all endeavour to see that the suit is disposed of at an early date in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶23

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

¶24

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶25

Rojalin

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Biswarupa Padhi v. Simanchal Maharana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswarupa Padhi v. Simanchal Maharana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binapani Das Vs State of Odisha

Ranjit Samal Vs Superitendent Engineer, Tpcodl, Cuttack

Surendra Kumar Sabarwal Vs Om Prakash Daga

Debasmita Sahoo Vs Ranjan Kumar Sahoo

Manjushree Dash Vs State of Odisha

M/S.Rama Chandi Enterprises Vs Mahanadi Coalfield Ltd.