Orissa High Court
Panchanan Debata vs Murari Chandra Mishra ..... Opp. ... on 13 February, 2025
Author: S.K.Sahoo
Bench: S.K.Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.901 of 2025
Panchanan Debata ..... Petitioner
Mr. T.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Murari Chandra Mishra ..... Opp. Parties
and another
Mr. Sarthak Pradhan,
Advocate
for opposite party no. 1
Mr. Sarat Pradhan,
Addl. Standing Counsel for
opposite party no.2
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
Order No. 13.02.2025
02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties.
As per the order dated 15.01.2025, the learned
counsel for the petitioner has already served copy of the
writ petition on the learned counsel for the opposite
party no.1.
It appears from the date chart filed by the
petitioner in this writ petition that there was an
agreement executed between the petitioner and the
opposite party no1 and the petitioner filed a Civil Suit in
the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Talcher-Angul
which was registered as C.S. No.183 of 2017 and the
present opposite party no.1 was the defendant no.1 in
the aforesaid suit which was filed for recovery of an
amount of Rs.5,25,804/- and for other ancillary relief
from the opposite party no.1. The learned Addl. Senior
Civil Judge, Talcher-Angul vide judgment and order
dated 24.09.2021 has been pleased to decree the suit in
favour of the petitioner and against the opposite party
no.1 and held that the petitioner is entitled to receive
Rs.5,25,804/- out of the compensation amount received
by the opposite no.1 along with cost of the suit and
directed the opposite party no.1 to pay the aforesaid
amount with cost of the suit to the petitioner within
three months from the date of judgment, failing which
the petitioner is at liberty to realize the same from the
opposite party no.1 through process of the Court.
Further it appears that the opposite party no.1
challenged the judgment and decree passed by the
learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Talcher-Angul in C.S.
No.183 of 2017 before the learned Addl. District Judge,
Talcher in RFA No.8 of 2021 and vide judgment and
order dated 26.10.2024, the Appellate Court has been
pleased to set aside the judgment and decree passed by
the learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Talcher-Angul in
the aforesaid suit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
challenging the order of the Appellate Court, the
petitioner has preferred RSA No.441 of 2024 before this
Court in which the learned counsel for the State has
been asked to obtain instruction. Learned counsel for
the opposite party no.1 submits that the opposite party
no.1 has already entered appearance in the aforesaid
RSA. So far as the execution of agreement is concerned,
it is disputed as it is the contention of the learned
counsel for the opposite party no.1 that the agreement
has not been acted upon for which the petitioner is not
entitled to get any compensation.
Be that as it may, since disputed questions of fact
are involved and this Court is in seisin over the matter
in RSA 441 of 2024, we are not inclined to entertain this
writ petition.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Signature
Pravakar Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRAVAKAR NAYAK
Designation: AR-cum-Senior Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 13-Feb-2025 20:21:08
