Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 12031 Ori
Judgement Date : 23 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ARBA No.4 Of 2018
(Through hybrid mode)
Ananta Charan Sahoo .... Appellant
Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Land Acquisition Officer and .... Respondents
others
Mr. A. Pattnaik, Advocate
CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
ORDER
23.11.2021 Order No.
6. 1. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant
and submits, the appeal is preferred against judgment dated 14th
December, 2017 made under section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996. He submits, petitioner having been aggrieved by the award
had approached the District Judge under section 34. The learned Judge
did not fully appreciate contentions of appellant and therefore the
appeal. Mr. Pattnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of
respondents and submits, his clients had also filed appeal against
impugned judgment because the learned Judge dealt with the
// 2 //
challenge as if it was an appeal. He submits, the Court adjudicating a
challenge under section 34 does not have powers of appellate Court.
2. It transpires that respondents' appeal ARBA no.18 of 2018
stood dismissed by operation of order dated 13th July, 2018. By said
order defects were directed to be removed within a week, failing
which the appeal would be dismissed without further reference to the
Bench.
3. In facts and circumstances above, Court made observations and
queries of parties. Respondents are to issue instruction regarding
whether they will forbear from taking steps to restore its appeal. This
direction because appellant has assured Court that on such
consideration, appellant will not press this appeal. Adjournment is
granted for parties to obtain instructions and submit.
4. List on 1st December, 2021.
(Arindam Sinha) Judge Sks
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!