Court dismissed a post-recess Code, challenged against District Judge/Civil Judge order, due to absence of counsel.
CMP No.33 of 2017 and Misc. Case No.40 of 2017 are dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No.33 of 2017
[ CNR No. ODHC010099082017 ]
1. Pravulal Bhagaban Jee (died)
2. Narayan Chandra Sahoo
3. Niranjan Sahoo
4. Sailendra Sahoo
…. Petitioners
None
-versus-
Radhsyam Mahawar
Opposite Party
None
CORAM:
HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
10.09.2026
Order No.
matter was called, the matter had been passed over to be taken up
after recess. When the matter is taken up after recess, no counsel appears on behalf of the parties.
Page 1 of 3
follows:-
“9. The learned trial Court as apparent from
the impugned order has rejected the petition of the petitioners U/S.47 CPC mainly on the premise that the 1st Appellate Court by order dtd. 31.01.2014 invoking the provision of Or.22 R.4 CPC exempted substitution of L.R of the deceased defendant no.1 Prabhulal Bhagwan Jee and that the said order of the learned 1st Appellate Court viz.3rd Addl. District Judge, Cuttack has been confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court in CMP 213 of 2014.
10. From the facts narrated above, no error or infirmity is noticed in the impugned order of the learned lower Court. After the substitution of LRs of deceased Defendant no.1 has been dispensed with by the 1st Appellate Court whose order has been confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court, as already noted above, the questions relating to death of the defendant no.1 and the consequences are no more relevant in so far as the present proceeding is concerned. Therefore the decree of the 1st Appellate Court cannot termed as nullity. So, no reason is found to interfere with the impugned order of the learned lower Court.
Page 2 of 3
Resultantly, the Revision being devoid of merit is dismissed on contest.
Send back the LCR to the learned lower Court.”
Misc. Case No.40 of 2017, no interim order had been passed.
Almost ten years have elapsed since the judgment in Civil Revision No.17 of 2016 is passed.
can be safely be presumed that nothing remains to be decided in the
CMP, which is accordingly dismissed.
(Savitri Ratho) Judge
RKS
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJAN KUMAR SETHI Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUT TACK Date: 10-Sep-2026 19:56:22
Page 3 of 3
Pravulal Bhagaban Jee (died) and others
Radhsyam Mahawar
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
