Haridaspur-Paradip Railway Co vs Surendra Samal & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 12210 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                               LAA No.110 of 2018

Haridaspur-Paradip Railway Co.,        .....                                 Appellant
Ltd., Khurda
                                                                Mr. S. Rout, Counsel
                                       Vs.

Surendra Samal & others                .....                              Respondents
                                                        Mr. A.K. Tripathy, Advocate
                                                        (for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4)
                                                                Mr. A. Behera, ASC
                                                      (for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6)
                                                    Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along with
                                                              Mr. B.K. Padhi, CGC.

                      CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                              ORDER

09.10.2023 Order No. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

06.

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant so also Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Behera, learned ASC for Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6 are present. Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI, being assisted by Mr. B.K. Padhi, CGC for Respondent No.6 is also present.

3. Though the matter has been listed today under the heading "For Orders" for consideration of the application for condonation of delay, Mr. Tripathy, learned Counsel for Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 4 submits, the present Appellant was not a party to L.A. Case No.11 of 2009, the judgment of which has been impugned in the present Appeal. He further submits, no application seeking leave of this Court has been filed to challenge the said judgment dated 07.02.2018 passed in L.A. Case No.11 of 2009. Since the Memorandum of Appeal is not maintainable at this stage, the application for condonation of delay does not deserve under any consideration.

4. Mr. S. Rout, learned proxy Counsel, on behalf of Mr. S.S. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Appellant, prays for a short adjournment to take necessary steps to overcome the said technical point raised by Mr. Tripathy, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 4. Pray for time is allowed.

5. Steps, as prayed for, be taken within two weeks hence after serving copy of the same on the learned Counsel for the Respondents, who may file their objection to the said Petition, if any, within a week thereafter.

6. Matter be listed in the week commencing from 06.11.2023 under the same heading.

               padma                                                          (S.K. MISHRA)
                                                                                   JUDGE




Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PADMA CHARAN DASH
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 12-Oct-2023 10:48:33