Parikhita Swain vs Ashalata Nayak & Ors. .... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 10893 Ori

Orissa High Court

Parikhita Swain vs Ashalata Nayak & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 10 December, 2025

Author: B. P. Routray

Bench: B. P. Routray

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 10-Dec-2025 16:55:55

                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                                       CMP No.1865 of 2025
                                 Parikhita Swain                           ....          Petitioner
                                                                   Mr. S.R.Mohapatra, Advocate
                                                             -versus-



                                 Ashalata Nayak & Ors.                     ....    Opposite Parties
                                                                         Mr. A.P.Bose, Advocate

                                             CORAM:
                                             SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                                           ORDER

10.12.2025 Order No.

01. 1. Heard Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner and

Mr. Bose, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.1.

2. Present CMP is directed against order dated 30th October 2025

of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), LR & LTV, Kendrapara passed

in C.S. No.265 of 2004, wherein the prayer to examine Ashalata

Nayak as a witness by Defendant No.25 has been allowed.

3. Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner, who is the

Plaintiff in the suit, by referring to earlier judgment of this Court

dated 23rd September 2025, submits that Defendant No.25 is to be

examined at the first instance before examination of Ashalata Nayak.

As such, he contends that permitting Ashalata Nayak to examine as a

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

witness on behalf of Defendant No.25 without examination of

Defendant No.25 amounts to violation of the order of this Court and

therefore, the learned Trial Court has committed error in that aspect.

4. Conversely, it is submitted by Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the

Opposite Party No.1 that since Defendant No.25 has furnished a

memo declining him to examine as a witness, there cannot be any

hindrance on his part to examine Ashalata Nayak as his witness.

5. The earlier order of this Court in judgment dated 23rd

September 2025 runs to the effect that the order of the Trial Court

rejecting the prayer of Defendant No.25 under Order 18 Rule 3A of

CPC regarding examination of Ashalata Nayak at the first instance

was confirmed. In other words, this Court in the earlier order observed

that the permission sought by Defendant No.25 to examine Ashalata

Nayak before his evidence, was disallowed. Now the situation is that

after said order of this Court dated 23rd September 2025, Defendant

No.25 recused himself to be examined as a witness and declining in

that aspect has filed a memo before the Trial Court. Thereafter, he

produces Ashalata Nayak to be examined as the witness on his behalf.

This being the change in the situation when Defendant No.25 declined

him to be examined as a witness, there cannot be any hindrance to

examine Ashalata Nayak as witness on his behalf and there would not

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

be any obstacle arose in terms of Order 18 Rule 3A of the CPC to

require permission of the Court. This being the situation, the

impugned order of the Trial Court is found without any infirmity and

accordingly confirmed.

6. The CMP is accordingly dismissed.

( B.P. Routray) Judge

S.Das