Bichitra Parida & Ors vs Rabindra Samal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4192 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             LAA No. 37 of 2021

Bichitra Parida & Ors.             .....                                   Appellants
                                                       Mr.B.K.Mohanty, Advocate
                                   Vs.
Rabindra Samal & Ors.              .....                                  Respondents
                                                          Mr.A.P.Bose, Advocate

                    CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                           ORDER

24.04.2023 Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

09.

2. Mr.B.K.Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Appellants, so also Mr.A.P.Bose, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 are present.

3. Pursuant to Order dated 17.03.2023, the Respondent Nos.3 to 12 have already rendered appearance on 13.04.2023. Learned Counsel for the said Respondents is absent on repeated calls.

4. Since the Respondent No.13 has refused to receive the notice on the plea of mismatch of her name and on verification of the case record it is found that her name has been correctly indicated in the postal envelope in terms of the cause title of the impugned judgment, notice on Respondent No.13 is held to be sufficient.

5. Though vide Order dated 17.03.2023, it was directed to file Objection to the I.A. No.36 of 2022 after serving copy of the same on learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2, Mr.Mohanty submits, today he has filed Objection with the Registry.

6. He hands up a copy of the Objection to Mr.Bose, learned Counsel for the Respondents.

7. As is found, vide Order dated 01.12.2021, as an interim, it was directed that the disbursement of the compensation amount awarded in term of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.

8. Thereafter, the matter got listed on 06.02.2023, 02.03.2023 and finally on 17.03.2023. In none of the said dates, learned Counsel for the Appellants brought to the notice of this Court as to the expiry of the said Interim Order dated 01.12.2021, which was in operation till 30.09.2022, nor prayed for extension of the said Interim Order on 30.09.2022 and thereafter.

9. Mr.Mohanty submits, if the Interim Order is not extended further and the amount is disbursed in terms of the impugned judgment, the appeal shall become infructuous.

10. He prays for a short adjournment to take necessary steps to file appropriate application for extension of the Interim Order to which Mr. Bose, learned Counsel for the Respondents Nos.1 & 2 vehemently opposes.

11. However, in view of the submission made by learned Counsel for the Appellants, matter be listed on 4th May, 2023. Steps, as prayed for, be taken in the meantime.

(S.K.MISHRA) JUDGE

Banita