R. Jagannath Reddy vs N. Jayalalitha
2023 Latest Caselaw 1891 Ori

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                  MATA No.9 of 2022

     R. Jagannath Reddy                     .........                   Appellant
                                                               Mr. R.N. Rout, Adv.
                                         -Versus-

     N. Jayalalitha                        ..........                   Respondent
                                                              Mr. S.J. Nayak, Adv.
                                        CORAM:
                                        JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
                                        JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
                                              ORDER

01.03.2023 I.A. No.10 of 2022.

Order No.

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

2. Mr. R.N. Rout, learned counsel appearing for the applicant has filed one banker's cheque dated 08.02.2023 for an amount of Rs.3,50,000/-. The said banker's cheque being No.009333 is drawn on HDFC Bank, Brahmapore Branch.

3. The said banker's cheque and the memorandum are taken on record.

4. As the condition-precedent has been complied by the applicant, we would take up this application for consideration.

5. According to the applicant, serious dislocation was created by the pandemic and he had lost the link with his counsel and as such, when the Judgment dated 11.03.2019 was passed, he did not get the information in time.

6. Though the explanations are not quite satisfactory, but as the decree was passed ex parte, and it is a reality that the pandemic has caused dislocation, we think that the said case can be considered for

condoning the delay. That apart, it has been asserted by the appellant that he has a good case on merit.

7. Mr. S.J. Nayak, learned counsel has appeared for the Opposite Party and on the basis of the objection filed by the Opposite Party, he has submitted that the delay is inordinate and there is no merit in the appeal. As such, this court should not consider the prayer for condonation of delay.

8. Having taken into consideration, the causes, as assigned, we would like to take a liberal approach. Moreover, this appeal emerges out from a matrimonial discord.

9. Accordingly, the delay of 222 days stands condoned.

10. In the result, this Interlocutory Application stands allowed and disposed of.

(S. Talapatra) Judge

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

MATA No.9 of 2022 Order No.

12. 1. Heard Mr. R.N. Rout, learned counsel appearing for the applicant.

2. Issue notice.

3. Notice is made returnable on 12.04.2023.

4. Since Mr. S.J. Nayak, learned counsel appears and waives notice for the respondent, no formal notice is called for.

5. It has been stated by Mr. Rout, learned counsel that the copy of the memorandum of appeal with all enclosures has already been supplied to Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent.

6. Registry is directed to procure the LCRs, by the next date.

7. The amount of Rs.3.5 lakhs as deposited by a banker's cheque today in I.A. No.10 of 2022 shall be delivered to the respondent after proper identification and following the standard procedure forthwith.

8. Mr. S.J. Nayak, learned counsel is directed to communicate this order to the respondent.

9. As a matter of caution, we also direct the respondent to keep this amount in the term deposit and not to spend any part of the said amount till the final decision is taken in this appeal.

(S. Talapatra) Judge

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

Rati Ranjan Nayak