Rangalata Behera Vs Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Khurda

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CMP No. 524 of 2025

¶3

Rangalata Behera ….. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Brahmananda Tripathy, Advocate -versus-

¶5

1. Bhubaneswar Municipal ….. Opposite Parties Corporation, BBSR 2. The Vice Chairman, Bhubaneswar Development Authority, BBSR 3. Bhubaneswar Development Authority, BBSR

¶6

Mr. Jateswar Nayak, AGA (Mr. Niranjan Panda, Advocate) (For O.P. No.1) (Mr. D. Mohapatra, Senior Advocate) (For O.Ps No.2 and 3)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

09.04.2025

Order No.

(Through hybrid Mode)

¶14

This CMP has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner with the following prayer:-

¶15

“It is therefore respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the C.M.P., issue notice to the opposite parties, call for the records from the Court below and after hearing would be pleased to allow the C.M.P. in favour of the petitioner thereby setting-aside the impugned order vide Annexure-6 and to pass necessary orders protecting the right of the petitioner over the suit land

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

till disposal of the interim application under Order-39 Rule1 & 2 CPC;

¶18

And further would be pleased to pass any other appropriate order or orders as may deem fit & proper in the eye of law.”

¶19

Annexure-6 is the order dated 27.03.2025 passed in I.A. No. 01 of 2025 arising out of F.A.O. No. 32 of 2025 passed by the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar, issuing notice to the respondents (Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Vice Chairman, Bhubaneswar Development Authority and Bhubaneswar Development Authority) fixing 07.04.2025. The prayer of the appellant-petitioner to serve the notices on the respondents-opposite parties through special process along with special process cost has also been allowed.

¶20

F.A.O. No. 32 of 2025 has been filed challenging the order dated 21.02.2025 passed in I.A. No. 01 of 2025 arising out of C.S. No. 146 of 2025 in the court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhubaneswar. This order has not been challenged in this CMP. 4. Perusal of the order dated 21.02.2025 reveals that the petition of the plaintiff/petitioner under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC praying for passing an ad-interim ex-parte injunction order in respect of the opposite parties/defendants has been rejected on the ground that cause of action arose on 02.06.2023 and the suit has been filed on 17.01.2025 and the gap between cause of action and filing of the suit is very long and so there is no urgency to allow the petition. Liberty had been granted to the petitioner to send the notice through Special Messenger and the case was posted to 7.03.2025 for service return and postal acknowledgment.

¶21

Page 2 of 4

¶22

Mr. Brahmananda Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not aware if notice has been sufficient on the opposite parties and whether they have appeared in the suit and what happened on 07.03.2025.

¶23

At this stage, Mr. D. Mohapatra, learned Senior Advocate submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the opposite parties no.2 and 3 (Bhubaneswar Development Authority) and Mr. Niranjan Panda, learned counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the opposite party no.1 (Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation). Both the learned counsel submit that notice in I.A. No. 01 of 2025 arising out of C.S. No. 146 of 2025 has not been served on the opposite parties till date.

¶24

They also state that the opposite parties have filed caveat petitions in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhubaneswar in respect of the suit through counsel, but copies of the I.A. have not been served on the counsel. They also submit that notice in the I.A. has not been served on Opposite Parties till date as steps have not been taken by the petitioner.

¶25

It appears that in W.P.(C) No. 8215 of 2025 filed in this Court by the petitioner along with others, this Court while disposing of the matter has directed the disposal of the suit to be filed by the petitioner within a period of six months. 9. In view of the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 8215 of 2025 and as the date fixed for appearance of the opposite parties (07.03.2025), has already elapsed, I am not inclined to entertain this CMP and delay disposal of the suit.

¶26

The CMP is disposed of requesting the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar to take up I.A. No. 01 of 2025 arising

¶27

Page 3 of 4

¶28

out of C.S. No. 146 of 2025 for disposal without granting unnecessary adjournment and if necessary by preponing the date, if notice is sufficient on the opposite parties.

¶29

For this purpose, it is open to the plaintiff/petitioner to serve copies of the I.A. on the learned counsel who have filed caveat on behalf of the opposite parties.

¶30

With the aforesaid observations, the CMP and I.A. No. 534 of 2025 are disposed of.

¶31

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶32

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶33

puspa

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 10-Apr-2025 20:01:19

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Rangalata Behera v. Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Khurda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rangalata Behera v. Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Khurda

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

Minati Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Jami Venkata Suryaprabha Vs Tarini Prasad Nayak

Niranjan Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Bimala Devi Passary Vs Binod Agarwal

Barendranath Behera Vs State of Odisha

Baidehi Majhi @ Bohidehi Majhi Vs State of Odisha