Disposed¶25

Prabhudatta Mohapatra v. Etishree Panda

Orissa HC15 Apr 2026WP(C)/26903/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Prabhudatta Mohapatra v. Etishree Panda; W.P.(C) No. 26903 of 2024; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo; order dated 15.04.2026; withdrawal of writ petition via memo; petition disposed of; visitation and contact rights; place of visitation objection; Family Court Bhubaneswar; C.P. No. 143 of 2020; Section 26 Hindu Marriage Act 1955; Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act; orders dated 2.1.2024 and 3.2.2024; no modification application filed; better application to be filed.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition accepted (memo taken on record); petitioner indicated he would file a better application; the petition stands disposed of. ¶25

Prabhudatta Mohapatra Vs Etishree Panda — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Withdrawal of the writ petition accepted (memo taken on record); petitioner indicated he would file a better application; the petition stands disposed of.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the order dated 29.06.2024 of the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar in C.P. No. 143 of 2020 (visitation and contact rights granted to the respondent-wife, with the directed place of visitation being the petitioner-husband's residence) should proceed.

¶16

Court's answer

The memo filed by learned counsel for the petitioner (stating that the petitioner will not pursue the present application and seeks to withdraw the writ petition to file a better application) shall be taken on record.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Following acceptance of the withdrawal memo, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court at Cuttack, W.P.(C) No. 26903 of 2024 (Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo, order dated 15.04.2026, hybrid mode): Petitioner-husband Prabhudatta Mohapatra challenged the order dated 29.06.2024 of the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar in C.P. No. 143 of 2020, whereby visitation and contact rights were granted to the respondent-wife Etishree Panda pursuant to her petition dated 03.02.2024, purportedly under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the pendency of the husband's divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband did not object to the visitation and contact rights granted by orders dated 2.1.2024 and 3.2.2024, but objected only to the directed place of visitation, i.e., his own residence; he had filed no modification application and no objection/written statement before the Family Court. On counsel filing a memo stating the petitioner would not pursue the application and sought to withdraw the writ petition to file a better application, the memo was taken on record and the petition stands disposed of. No precedent was cited and no substantive ruling was made on visitation arrangements.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 26903 of 2024

¶2

Prabhudatta Mohapatra

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. A. Singh, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Etishree Panda

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO

ORDER

Order

No.

15.04.2026 (Hybrid Mode)

¶14

¶15

1. The learned counsel for the petitioner is heard at length.

¶16

2. Petitioner-husband is before this Court challenging the order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar in C.P. No.143 of 2020. The said order dated 29.06.2024 emanates from the petition dated 03.02.2024 filed by the respondent-wife in the C.P. seeking visitation and contact rights purportedly under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

¶17

3. The C.P. has been filed by the petitioner herein husband in the marriage seeking divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act which is pending adjudication. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitionerhusband that the husband is not objecting regarding the visitation and contact rights granted to the wife as per the directions contained in the orders dated 2.1.2024 and

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

3.2.2024, but the place of visitation as directed i.e. residence of the petitioner-husband is objected to.

¶20

4. In response to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, on being asked whether the petitioner-husband has sought for any modification regarding the place of visitation and contact, before the learned Judge, Family Court by filing appropriate application, it is submitted that no such application has been made. Further on being asked whether in response to the application filed by the wife-mother of the child any objection/written statement was filed indicating regarding the place of visitation and contact, the answer is also in the negative.

¶21

5. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner files memo of date indicating that the petitioner will not pursue the present application.

¶22

6. The memo states thus :

¶23

“1. That the petitioner seeks to withdraw the current writ petition to file a better application. 2. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly allow the same for the interest of justice.”

¶24

7. The memo shall be taken on record. Scanned copy be updated.

¶25

8. The petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)

¶27

Judge

¶28

Signature Not Verified dutta

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: AJIT KUMAR DUTTA Reason: Authentication Location: ohc Date: 17-Apr-2026 20:01:50