Tirthajani Panda vs Bibhuti Shankar Padhi ..... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 1980 Ori

Orissa High Court

Tirthajani Panda vs Bibhuti Shankar Padhi ..... Opposite ... on 1 August, 2025

Author: Savitri Ratho

Bench: Savitri Ratho

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                       CRLREV No.523 of 2023
Tirthajani Panda             ....                               Petitioner
                                       Mr. Anam Charan Panda, Advocate
                             Vs.
Bibhuti Shankar Padhi        .....                         Opposite Party
                                              Mr. Sougat Dash, Advocate
             CORAM:
                 JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
                                    ORDER

01.08.2025 Order No. (Through hybrid mode)

11. 1. This matter has been listed under the heading of "To Be

Mentioned" for clarification of some points.

2. Heard Mr. Anam Charan Panda, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Sougat Dash, learned counsel for the opposite party

further.

3. Mr. Anam Charan Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that on 02.12.2015, the opposite party was directed to pay

Rs.10,000/- as interim maintenance in the D.V. Misc. Case. This order

has not been challenged by the opposite party before any forum.

After the final order in the D.V. Misc. Case was set aside and the

matter remanded to the learned Magistrate for fresh disposal, the said

order got revived and the parties were relegated to their earlier

position. So the opposite party is liable to pay Rs.10,000/- per month

to the petitioner towards interim maintenance. But he has not paid

such amount.

4. Mr. Sougat Dash, learned counsel for the opposite party, submits

that while setting aside the final order in the D.V. Misc. Case, the

learned Appellate Court has directed for payment of Rs.50,000/-

(which was later increased to Rs.65,000/-) to the petitioner, which has

been paid by the opposite party. These orders have not been

challenged by the petitioner. He relied upon the decision of the

Supreme Court in the case of Prem Chandra Agarwal and Another

vrs. UP Financial Corporation and Others reported in (2009) 11

SCC 479 and submits that the interim order had merged with the final

order which has been set aside by the learned Appellate Court, so the

interim order no longer survives.

5. Hearing is concluded. Judgment is reserved.

puspa ..............................

(SAVITRI RATHO) JUDGE

Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 01-Aug-2025 20:36:53