Disposed¶26

Jayashree Kumari Devi v. Puspa Kumari Devi

Orissa HC9 Mar 2026CMP/290/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Article 227 Constitution of India; Order 9 Rule 13 CPC; setting aside ex parte decree; inaction of appellate court; vacancy of judicial office A.D.J. Bhawanipatna; stay of Execution Proceeding E.C No.02 of 2022; Civil Judge (Senior Division) Bhawanipatna; CMP No.214 of 2026; order dated 25.02.2026; Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025; ADJ-cum-Special Judge Vigilance Bhawanipatna Kalahandi; liberty to approach Revisional Court; early disposal; parties to cooperate; disposal of CMP; urgent certified copy.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move the learned Revisional Court (ADJ-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi) for early disposal of the Order 9 Rule 13 application; Revisional Court to endeavour to dispose of it; parties directed to cooperate in terms of order dated 25.02.2026. ¶26

Jayashree Kumari Devi Vs Puspa Kumari Devi — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Given the limited grievance of the Petitioner (inaction of the appellate court on the Order 9 Rule 13 application due to vacancy at A.D.J., Bhawanipatna), whether the CMP should be disposed of by channelling the prayer for early disposal through the Revisional Court before which Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025 arising out of the self-same suit is pending.

¶25

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the CMP application by granting liberty to the petitioner to move the learned Revisional Court, before whom Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025 arising out of the self-same suit is pending, with a prayer for early disposal of the application under Order 9 Rule 13.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

If such an application is moved, the learned Revisional Court shall consider the prayer of the Petitioner and make every endeavour to dispose of the application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC.

¶25

Key takeaways

The parties were directed to cooperate with the learned Revisional Court for early disposal of the applications in terms of the order dated 25.02.2026.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CMP No.290 of 2026 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, order dated 09.03.2026, Aditya Kumar Mohapatra J.). Jayashree Kumari Devi, described as legal heir(s) of the original defendant, filed this CMP under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the inaction of the learned appellate court (A.D.J., Bhawanipatna, whose office lay vacant with no judicial officer posted) in taking up the application under Order 9 Rule 13 for setting aside an ex parte decree, and prayed for a stay of Execution Proceeding E.C No.02 of 2022 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna. Counsel for Opposite Party No.1 pointed out that CMP No.214 of 2026 had already been disposed of vide order dated 25.02.2026, directing the learned Revisional Court (ADJ-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi) to expedite Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025 arising out of the self-same suit, and raised no objection to the present application likewise being taken up by that court. Keeping in view the limited nature of the grievance, the Court disposed of the CMP by granting liberty to the petitioner to move the Revisional Court with a prayer for early disposal of the Order 9 Rule 13 application; the Revisional Court was asked to consider the prayer and make every endeavour to dispose of the application, and the parties were directed to cooperate for early disposal in terms of the order dated 25.02.2026. Urgent certified copy ordered to be issued the same day.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.290 of 2026

¶2

Jayashree Kumari Devi

¶3

.....

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Represented by Adv. - Rajendra Kumar Mund

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Puspa Kumari Devi & Anr. ..... Opposite Parties

¶8

Represented by Adv. 3 Amit Prasad Bose, Adv. for O.P. No.1

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

09.03.2026

Order No.

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

¶16

Mr.Amit Prasad Bose, learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a vakalatnama in Court today and the same be kept on record.

¶17

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.1. Perused the CMP Petition as well as the prayer made therein.

¶18

By filing the present CMP application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the legal heirs of the original DefendantPetitioner has approached this Court upon being aggrieved by the inaction of the learned appellate court in taking up the application of the Petitioner filed under Order 9 Rule 13.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended

¶20

Page 1 of 3.

¶21

that though the application was filed by the Petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 for setting aside an ex parte decree, however, the same is pending before the learned A.D.J., Bhawanipatna. He further submitted that the office of the learned A.D.J., Bhawanipatna is lying vacant and no judicial officer has been posted there. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner prayed that the Execution Proceeding bearing E.C No.02 of 2022 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna be stayed till disposal of the application which is pending before the learned A.D.J., Bhawanipatna.

¶22

Mr.Bose, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.1 on the other hand contended that earlier the Petitioner approached this Court by filing the CMP No.214 of 2026 which was disposed of vide order dated 25.02.2026. He further submitted that vide order dated 25.02.2026, this Court while disposing of the previous CMP application by directing the learned Revisional Court, i.e., the learned ADJ-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi, before whom Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025 is pending, to take necessary steps for early disposal of the abovenoted Civil Revision. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Opposite Party contended that since this Court has already directed the learned Revisional Court, i.e., the learned ADJcum-Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi to take up the revision petition, the present application can also be taken up by the very same court, and in such eventuallity he will have no objection to the same.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the

¶24

Page 2 of 3.

¶25

background facts, further keeping in view the limited nature of the grievance of the Petitioner, as the present CMP application is being disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to move the learned Revisional Court before whom Civil Revision No.3/1 of 2025, arising out of the self-same suit, is pending, with a prayer for early disposal of his application under Order 9 Rule 13. In the event any such application is moved by the Petitioner, the learned Revisional Court before whom the application is pending, shall do well to consider the prayer of the Petitioner and make every endeavour to dispose of the application of the Petitioner filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC. The parties are directed to cooperate with the learned Revisional Court for an early disposal of the applications in terms of order dated 25.02.2026.

¶26

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CMP application stands disposed of.

¶27

Issue urgent certified copy of this order in course of the day.

¶28

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶29

Anil

¶30

Signature Not Verified Page 3 of 3.

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Mar-2026 14:58:11

Jayashree Kumari Devi v. Puspa Kumari Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayashree Kumari Devi v. Puspa Kumari Devi

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

Muralidhar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Kishore Kedia Vs Harsh Vardhan Tibrewal

Dr. Kumarmani Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Usharani Jena Vs State of Odisha

Rajkishore Acharya Vs State of Odisha

Manjushree Dash Vs State of Odisha