Dhanurdhar Padhiary vs Pravakar Mishra And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 918 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                               CMP No. 1567 OF 2014
                 Dhanurdhar Padhiary                ....      Petitioner
                                            Mr. Bikram Rath, Advocate
                                     -versus-
                 Pravakar Mishra and others                 .... Opp. Parties
                                                 Mr. B.S. Rayaguru, Advocate
                                                  (For Opp. Party Nos.1 to 4)
                                                 Mr. H.K. Tripathy, Advocate
                                                 (For Opp. Party Nos.7 and 8)

                      CORAM:
                      JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                         ORDER

Order No.                               24.01.2023
   7.       1.      This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. This CMP has been filed assailing the order dated 21st November, 2014 (Annexure-5) passed by learned District Judge, Cuttack in R.F.A. No.120 of 2014, whereby an application to stay of judgment and decree dated 21st October, 2014 and 31st October, 2014 respectively passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Athgarh in C.S. (I) No.73 of 2009, has been rejected.

3. On perusal of the record, it appears that while issuing notice in the matter, this Court vide order dated 17th December, 2014 in Misc. Case No.1480 of 2014 passed the following order:

"Misc. Case No.1480 of 2014 Issue notice as above. Accept one set of process fee.

As an interim measure, this Court directs that status quo as on date in respect of the suit schedule properties shall be maintained by both parties till the next date."

The said order is continuing till date and in the meantime more than eight years have already elapsed.

// 2 //

4. Mr. Rayaguru, learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 4 vehemently objected to the same and submits that if the prayer made by learned counsel for the Petitioner is allowed, it will make a contested decree ineffective.

5. Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.7 and 8 submits that he has misplaced the brief and prays for an adjournment.

6. Since this Court while issuing notice in the matter has directed the parties to maintain status quo over the suit property and the said interim order is continuing till date, this Court feels that instead of delving into the merits of the case, interest of justice will be best served, if a direction is made to dispose of the appeal, i.e., R.F.A. No. 120 of 2014 at an early date giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

7. Accordingly, this Court without delving into the merits of the impugned order under Annexure-5, directs learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Athgarh, before whom the matter is pending, dispose of R.F.A. No.120 of 2014 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

8. It is further directed that the parties should maintain status quo over the suit property till disposal of the appeal.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

                                         (K.R. Mohapatra)
ms                                             Judge