Disposed¶22

Suresh Chandra Padhan v. Girija Kumar Mohapatra

Orissa HC20 May 2024CMP/395/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court; CMP No. 395/2024; Suresh Chandra Padhan v. Girija Kumar Mohapatra; early disposal of suit; C.S. No. 20 of 2022; Senior Civil Judge (W) Bhawanipatna; thirty-seven adjournments; adduction of evidence; cost imposed for adjournments; objection to adjournment; reasoned order; liberal adjournments barred during evidence stage; disposed with direction.

What did the court decide?

CMP disposed of with directions: (i) objections of the Defendant-Petitioner to adjournments sought by the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties to adduce evidence to be considered in accordance with law with a reasoned order; and (ii) the trial Court not to grant liberal adjournment to any party, particularly when the suit is posted for adducing evidence. ¶22

Suresh Chandra Padhan Vs Girija Kumar Mohapatra — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the CMP should result in a direction for early disposal of C.S. No. 20 of 2022 (Senior Civil Judge (W), Bhawanipatna) and restraint on adjournments sought by the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties for adducing evidence. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

This Court found that the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties are taking repeated adjournments in the suit to adduce evidence.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Although counsel submitted that adjournments were being granted despite the Defendant's objection, the Court found that there is neither any material available nor any averment to that effect made in the CMP.

¶21

Key takeaways

The CMP is disposed of with a direction that any adjournment prayed for by the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties to adduce evidence, if objected to by the Defendant-Petitioner, shall be considered in accordance with law and a reasoned order passed.ratio¶22
The learned trial Court should not grant liberal adjournment to any of the parties to the suit, more particularly when the suit is posted for adducing evidence.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK (K.R. MOHAPATRA, J.), Order dated 20.05.2024 in CMP No. 395 of 2024 — Suresh Chandra Padhan v. Girija Kumar Mohapatra and others. Defendant-Petitioner sought early disposal of C.S. No. 20 of 2022 (learned Senior Civil Judge (W), Bhawanipatna), submitting that thirty-seven adjournments had been granted to the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties to adduce evidence since 28.09.2022 despite imposed cost and his objections. The Court found the Plaintiffs were indeed taking repeated adjournments and that cost had been imposed, but noted there was neither material nor averment that adjournments were granted despite the Defendant's objection. CMP disposed of with directions that any Plaintiff adjournment objected to by the Defendant be considered in accordance with law with a reasoned order, and that the trial Court grant no liberal adjournments, particularly while the suit stands posted for adducing evidence. No statute or precedent cited; quantum of imposed cost not stated.

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 21-May-2024 10:28:05

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

CMP No. 395 OF 2024 Suresh Chandra Padhan

¶5

…. Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Akash Kumar Pattajoshi, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

Girija Kumar Mohapatra and others

¶9

…. Opp. Parties

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

¶11

Order No.

¶12

ORDER 20.05.2024

¶13

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

The Petitioner in this CMP seeks for a direction for early disposal of C.S. No.20 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge (W), Bhawanipatna.

¶15

Mr. Pattajoshi, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as many as thirty seven adjournments have been granted to the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties to adduce evidence in the suit. In spite of imposition of cost, the Plaintiffs are taking repeated adjournments. The suit is being adjourned at the instance of the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties since 28^th September, 2022. In spite of the objection of the Defendant-Petitioner, the suit is being adjourned. Hence, the Defendant-Petitioner is seriously prejudiced. He, therefore, submits that no further adjournment should be granted to the Plaintiffs in the suit and it may be disposed of at an early date.

¶16

Taking note of the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court finds that the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties are taking repeated adjournments in the suit to adduce

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 21-May-2024 10:28:05

¶21

evidence. Learned trial Court has also imposed cost for granting adjournment to the Plaintiffs. Although it is submitted by learned counsel for the Defendant-Petitioner that in spite of objection of the Defendant, adjournment is being granted to the Plaintiffs, but there is neither any material available nor any averment to that effect has been made in the CMP.

¶22

In that view of the matter, the CMP is disposed of with a direction that in the event, the Defendant-Petitioner objects to the adjournment, if any, prayed for by the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties to adduce evidence in the suit, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and a reasoned order should be passed. Learned trial Court should not also grant liberal adjournment to any of the parties to the suit, more particularly, when the suit is posted for adducing evidence.

¶23

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

¶24

(K.R. Mohapatra)

¶25

¶26

Judge

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Suresh Chandra Padhan v. Girija Kumar Mohapatra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Chandra Padhan v. Girija Kumar Mohapatra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudarshan Patri Vs Gouranga Chandra Panda

Malli Panda Vs Bhagaban Panda

Chandrasekhar Rout Vs Odisha Information Commission, Bbsr

Kavita Parija Vs Manoranjan Mohapatra,Secy., C.D.a., Cuttack

Raj Kumar Lima Vs Public Information Officer

M/S Agrishank Logistic, Jamshedpur Vs East Coast Railway, Rail Sadan, Bbsr