Sujata Dash v. Dillip Keshari Panda

Orissa HC9 Apr 2026CMP/457/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Article 227 Constitution of India; Order VIII Rule 9 CPC; belated written statement; acceptance of written statement; eviction suit; arrear rent; landlord-tenant; expeditious/time-bound disposal (one year); adjournments; Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jajpur; C.S. No.98 of 2025; CMP No.457 of 2026; Annexure-8; Orissa High Court; Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra. Disposition: CMP disposed of; impugned order dated 22.01.2026 left undisturbed; suit to be concluded preferably within one year.

What did the court decide?

CMP disposed of without interfering with the order dated 22.01.2026 (Annexure-8); trial court directed to dispose of C.S. No.98 of 2025 at the earliest, preferably within one year; parties directed to cooperate and not seek unnecessary adjournments. ¶¶24

Sujata Dash Vs Dillip Keshari Panda — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jajpur in C.S. No.98 of 2025, accepting the Defendant's written statement under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC, is sustainable in law.

¶¶19

Court's answer

Although the Defendant was at fault in filing the written statement at a belated stage, the learned trial court acted in exercise of its discretion under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC in accepting it; the High Court accordingly deemed it proper to dispose of the CMP without interfering with the order dated 22.01.2026.

¶¶20

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial court was directed to make every endeavour to dispose of C.S. No.98 of 2025 at the earliest, preferably within a period of one year, and the parties were directed to cooperate with the trial court and not seek any unnecessary adjournment during the trial.

¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (CMP under Article 227, Constitution of India): Petitioner, Plaintiff-landlord in C.S. No.98 of 2025 (eviction and arrear rent suit before Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jajpur), challenged the trial court's order dated 22.01.2026 accepting the tenant-Defendant's belated written statement under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC. The Court observed that although the Defendant was at fault in filing the written statement late, its acceptance was within the trial court's discretion, and that issuing notice to the Opposite Party would only delay the eviction suit; it therefore disposed of the CMP without interfering with the impugned order, while directing the trial court to make every endeavour to dispose of the suit at the earliest, preferably within one year, and directing the parties to cooperate and not seek unnecessary adjournments.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.457 of 2026

Sujata Dash

.....

Petitioner

Represented by Adv. – Mr. Bhagaban Mohanty

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Dillip Keshari Panda

.....

Opposite Party

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER

¶12

09.04.2026

¶13

Order No.

¶14

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

¶15

Head the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the CMP application as well as the prayer made therein.

¶16

The Petitioner, who happens to be the Plaintiff in C.S. No.98 of 2025 which was filed with a prayer for eviction and for arrear rent, has approached this Court by filing the present CMP application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India thereby challenging the order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jajpur in C.S. No.98 of 2025.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that by virtue of impugned order dated 22.01.2026, the learned trial court has accepted the W.S. filed by the Defendant

¶18

Page 1 of 3 .

¶19

under Order-8 Rule-9 of the C.P.C. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the impugned order dated 22.01.2026 at Annexure-8 is unsustainable in law inasmuch as the same is contrary to the express provisions contained in the Civil Procedure Code. He further contended that the Defendant, who is the tenant under the Plaintiff-Petitioner, has deliberately delaying the suit and that he does not want to vacate the suit premises. In the aforesaid factual background, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that order dated 22.01.2026 is unsustainable in law.

¶20

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, on a careful examination of the background facts, this Court observes that although Defendant was at fault in filing the written statement at a belated stage, the same has been accepted by the learned trial court in exercise of its discretion under Order-8 Rule-9 of the C.P.C. Moreover, this Court is also considered the fact that in the event any notice is issued to the Opposite Party, the same will cause unnecessary delay in disposal of the suit. The suit being an eviction suit, the same is required to be disposed of expeditiously, which would be the interest of the Plaintiff-Landlord.

¶21

Keeping in view the aforesaid analysis, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present CMP application without interfering with the order dated 22.01.2026 at Annexure-8 and with a further direction to the learned trial court to make every endeavour to dispose of the suit at the earliest, preferably within

¶22

Page 2 of 3 .

¶23

a period of one year. Parties of the suit are directed to cooperate with the trial court for early disposal of the suit and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment during the trial

¶24