Disposed¶21

Swagatika Bisoi v. Debashish Naik

Orissa HC16 Jan 2025WP(C)/26127/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court writ petition disposed of; impugned Family Court Dhenkanal orders (Annexure-5, 6, 6(A)) rejecting time petition, setting petitioner-wife exparte and closing evidence set aside; liberty granted to participate; trial Court to permit participation from stage of further cross-examination of PW1; parties directed to cooperate; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders (Annexure-5, 6 and 6(A)) set aside; Petitioner granted liberty to approach the concerned Court to participate in further proceedings, with the trial Court to allow her to take part from the stage of further cross-examination of PW1; parties directed to cooperate with the trial Court. ¶21

Swagatika Bisoi Vs Debashish Naik — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, whose time petition was rejected and who was set exparte with evidence closed by the Family Court, Dhenkanal, should be afforded an opportunity to participate in the proceeding.

¶17

Court's answer

The impugned orders (Annexure-5, 6 and 6(A)) are set aside and the Petitioner is granted liberty to approach the concerned Court for allowing her to participate in the further proceeding.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Upon the Petitioner approaching, the learned trial Court shall allow her to take part in the proceeding from the stage of further cross-examination of PW1.

¶20

Key takeaways

Both parties are directed to cooperate with the learned trial Court.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice G. Satapathy), Order No.07 dated 16.01.2025 in WP(C) No.26127 of 2023 — Swagatika Bisoi v. Debashish Naik. The Petitioner challenged orders at Annexure-5, 6 and 6(A) of the Judge, Family Court, Dhenkanal, by which her time petition was rejected, she was set exparte, her evidence was closed and the record was put up for arguments. Her counsel did not dispute the orders but prayed for an opportunity to participate; the OP's counsel raised no serious objection though he condemned the Petitioner-wife's conduct. Taking a holistic view, the Court set aside the impugned orders, granted the Petitioner liberty to approach the concerned Court, and directed that the learned trial Court shall allow her to take part in the proceeding from the stage of further cross-examination of PW1, with both parties directed to cooperate with the trial Court. Writ petition disposed of. No statute or precedent was cited.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

WP(C) No.26127 of 2023

¶3

Swagatika Bisoi

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. R.R. Sahoo, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Debashish Naik

¶8

… Opposite Parties

¶9

Mr. B.C. Parija, Advocate

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL)

Order No.

07.

16.01.2025

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

¶16

This is a writ application by the Petitioner seeking to challenge under Annexure-5,6 and 6(A) by which the learned Judge, Family Court, Dhenkanal has rejected the time petition of the present Petitioner, set her exparte in the proceeding, close the evidence and put up the record for arguments.

¶17

In the course of hearing of the writ petition, Mr. Rajesh Ranjan Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner without disputing the order passed under Annexure-5,6 and 6(A) submits that the Petitioner being a helpless wife of OP may be provided with opportunity to participate in the proceeding. On the other hand, Mr.Bikash Parija, learned counsel for the OP does not raise any serious objection to such prayer of the petitioner, but he, however, condemns the conduct of the Petitioner-wife.

¶18

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, since the Petitioner craves leave

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

to participate in the proceeding and she has got right to put forth her case before the concerned Court and taking a holistic view by looking at the dispute between the parties, this Court while setting aside the impugned orders grants liberty to the Petitioner to approach the concerned Court for allowing her to participate in the further proceeding in the matter and in such event, the learned trial Court shall allow the Petitioner to take part in the proceeding from the stage of further crossexamination of PW1.

¶21

The parties are, however, directed to cooperate with the learned trial Court. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶22

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶23

Priyajit

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRIYAJIT SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORI SSA Date: 20-Jan-2025 10:35:46

¶26

Page 2 of 2