Debraj Mohanty And Others vs Labani Dei ... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 10769 Ori

Orissa High Court

Debraj Mohanty And Others vs Labani Dei ... Opposite Party on 8 December, 2025

Author: B.P. Routray

Bench: B.P. Routray

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 13-Dec-2025 13:02:57


                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                               CMP No.1103 of 2025
                      (In the matter of an application under Article 227 of the Constitution
                      of India)

                      Debraj Mohanty and others                      ...           Petitioners

                                                          -versus-
                      Labani Dei                                     ...           Opposite Party

                      Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

                                   For Petitioners         :         Mr.G.Mukherji, Sr.Advocate

                                   For Opposite Party      :         Ms.D.Mahapatra, Advocate



                                       CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY

                                                   JUDGMENT

th 8 December, 2025

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Present CMP is directed assailing the order dated 23rd March

2023 passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Jajpur to the extent

rejecting the prayer of the defendants in C.S. No.687 of 2019 and

C.S.No.745 of 2019 for analogous hearing of both the suits.

2. Head Mr. Mukherji, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners

and Ms. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the Opposite Party.

Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL

Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Dec-2025 13:02:57

3. Present Petitioners are defendants in both the suits i.e. C.S.

No.687 of 2019 and C.S. No.745 of 2019 pending before the same

Court i.e. learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Jajpur. According to the

submission of the Petitioners, the schedules of land mentioned in both

the suits are adjacent though situating in different mouza. It is further

submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that the nature of suit as well as

the parties in both the suits are same and similar and the pleadings

taken by the parties in the plaint as well as written statement are

almost same.

4. Conversely, Ms. Mahapatra, learned counsel appearing for the

Opposite Party (Plaintiff) objects the prayer for analogous hearing of

both the suits mainly on the ground that the properties are different

and C.S.No.687 of 2019 has been proceeded to the stage of

completion of evidence from the side of the plaintiff. On the other

hand, C.S. No.745 of 2019 has been directed to be completed in a

time bound manner by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CMP

No.550 of 2021. Therefore, it would be unnecessary to hear both the

suits analogously.

5. The prayer of the defendants for analogues hearing of both the

suits is definitely not harmful to the interest of the Plaintiff in both the

Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL

Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Dec-2025 13:02:57

suits. When the parties are same and the nature of the suits are similar

with almost similar pleading, it would not be inappropriate for trial of

the suits analogously. It would be easier for the parties to adduce their

evidence as common witnesses in both the suits and it would be also

easier on the part of the parties to proceed in both the suits on the

same day. It needs to be mentioned here that analogous hearing of the

suit should not be confused with consolidation of suits and both the

concepts are quite different. Analogous hearing of both the suits does

not render the Court to give a common judgment and it is not required

to frame common issues also. In a matter of analogous hearing, the

Court is required to hear both the suits simultaneously on one day for

convenience of the parties to adduce their evidence and taking steps.

In Mahalaxmi Coop. Housing Society Ltd. v. Ashabhai Atmaram

Patel, (2013) 4 SCC 404, it is explained that, " .. .. There is no

specific provision in CPC for consolidation of suits. Such a power has

to be exercised only under Section 151 CPC. The purpose of

consolidation of suits is to save costs, time and effort and to make the

conduct of several actions more convenient by treating them as one

action. Consolidation of suits is ordered for meeting the ends of

justice as it saves the parties from multiplicity of proceedings, delay

and expenses and the parties are relieved of the need of adducing the

Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL

Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Dec-2025 13:02:57

same or similar documentary and oral evidence twice over in the two

suits at two different trials. Reference may be made to the judgment of

this Court in Prem Lala Nahata v. Chandi Prasad Sikaria [(2007) 2

SCC 551]."

6. Since the properties in both the suits are different but the parties

are same, the analogous hearing of both the suits, instead of

consolidation of suits, would be appropriate on the part of learned trial

court to hear both the suits together on the same day keeping

independence of each suit unaffected. Thus in the circumstances, and

keeping in view the convenience of the parties as well as the Court, it

is directed for analogous hearing of C.S. No.687 of 2019 and C.S.

No.745 of 2019. The impugned order dated 23 rd March 2023 of the

learned trial court to this extent is set aside.

7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the CMP

is disposed of.

( B.P. Routray) Judge

C.R.Biswal, A.R.-cum-Sr.Seretary