Goura Mohan Mohanta & Others vs Basa Soren & Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 10002 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 10002 Ori
Judgement Date : 14 November, 2025

Orissa High Court

Goura Mohan Mohanta & Others vs Basa Soren & Others on 14 November, 2025

                    ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK




                         CMAPL No.26 of 2024

An application under Order 41, Rule 19 of the CPC for readmission of the 2nd Appeal.




                                     ***

Goura Mohan Mohanta & Others ... Petitioners.

-VERSUS-


  Basa Soren & Others
                                             ...             Opposite Parties.



Counsel appeared for the parties:

For the Petitioners               : Mr. N.K. Sahu, Advocate.
                                      Along with Mr. S.S. Sahu, Adv.

For the Opposite Parties          : None

P R E S E N T:

                      HONOURABLE
          MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA



Date of Hearing: 28.10.2025            ::   Date of Judgment : 14.11.2025



                                 J UDGMENT

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--

1. This Civil Misc. Application under Order41, Rule 19 of the

CPC, 1908 has been filed by the petitioners (those were the

appellants in the Second Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) against

the Opposite Parties (those were the respondents in the Second

Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) praying for readmission of the

S.A. No.85 of 1999 which was dismissed on dated 10.01.2024 for

the default of the appellants (petitioners).

2. The factual backgrounds of this CMAPL under Order 41,

Rule 19 of the CPC, 1908, which prompted the petitioners for

filing of the same is that, the date of hearing of the 2nd Appeal

vide S.A. No.85 of 1999 was fixed to 10.01.2024, but due to non-

reflection of the name of the newly engaged counsel in the cause

list i.e. Mr. N.K. Sahu & Associates, he (learned counsel Mr. N.K.

Sahu) was not presented before the Court on dated 10.01.2024,

for which, due to non-appearance of the appellants or their

learned counsel on dated 10.01.2024, the 2nd Appeal vide S.A.

No.85 of 1999 was dismissed on that day i.e. on 10.01.2024 for

non-prosecution from the side of the appellants.

Thereafter, on dated 19.01.2024, the appellants of the 2nd

Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999 being the petitioners filed this

CMAPL under Order 41, Rule 19 of the CPC, 1908 for

readmission of that 2nd Appeal after setting aside its dismissal

order dated 10.01.2024 stating the aforesaid grounds for hearing

of the same on merit or else they (petitioners) shall be prejudiced

seriously and sustain irreparable loss, because, the petitioners

(Appellants in the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) are

interested for hearing of that 2nd Appeal on merit.

In spite of sufficiency of notices against the Opp. Parties

(those were the respondents in the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of

1999) none appeared for the hearing of the CMAPL. For which,

this CMAPL was heard only from the side of the petitioners.

3. It appears from the record that, soon after the dismissal of

the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999 for the default of the

petitioners i.e. for non-prosecution from the side of the

petitioners (appellants in the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999),

they (petitioners) filed this CMAPL for readmission of that 2nd

Appeal after setting aside its dismissal order stating that, they

(petitioners) are interested for hearing of that 2nd Appeal on merit

and due to non-mentioning of the names of the newly engaged

learned counsels i.e. Mr. N.K. Sahu and his Associates in the

cause list, their learned counsel Mr. N.K. Sahu could not remain

present on dated 10.01.2024 in the Court.

4. It is the settled propositions of law that,

"when law of technicalities and the courses of substantial justice are pitted against each other, in that case, the courses of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. Because, Courts should always be in favour of rendering substantial justice to the parties rather than disposing of the suits/appeals on technicalities, only for the reason that, the rights of the parties are to be adjudicated upon merits of the controversies. A party should not be thrown out merely on technicalities. Law Courts will lose their efficacy, if they will not possibly respond to the needs of the societies. Technicalities there might be many, but the justice oriented approach ought not to be thwarted on the basis of such technicalities, since technicalities cannot and ought not to outweigh the courses of justice."

5. The purpose of enactment and object of the Civil Procedure

Code is to enable both the parties to get the hearing of the case

on merit.

On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been

clarified by the Apex Court in the ratio of the following decisions:

I. In a case between Sumitibai & Others Vs. Paras Finance Co. & Others reported in IV (2007) CLT 37 (SC) (Para No.8) that, the purpose of enactment

and object of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) is really rules of natural justice. Its purpose is to enable both parties to get hearing.

II. In a case between Alka Gupta vs Narender Kumar Gupta reported in 2010 (10) SCC 141 that, Code of Civil Procedure is nothing, but an exhaustive compilation-cum-enumeration of the principles of natural justice with reference to a proceeding in a court of law.

6. Here in this matter at hand, when the petitioners have

approached the Court very promptly by filing this CMAPL on

dated 19.01.2024 after dismissal of their 2nd Appeal vide S.A.

No.85 of 1999 on dated 10.01.2024 for its readmission and when

the petitioners are eagerly interested for hearing of the 2nd Appeal

on merit after setting aside of the impugned order of dismissal

passed on dated 10.01.2024 and when the main object and

purpose of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 is to enable both the

parties to get hearing of the suit/appeal/case on merit instead of

disposing of the same on any technical ground, for no other

reason, but only in order to avoid the multiplicity of litigations

between the parties, then, at this juncture, by applying the