Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha And Another vs Trinath Kumar Sahoo And Others on 24 September, 2025
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra, Savitri Ratho
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 25-Sep-2025 12:42:57 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No. 1155 OF 2022
State of Odisha and another .... Appellants
Mr. Sabita Ranjan Pattnaik,
Additional Government Advocate
-versus-
Trinath Kumar Sahoo and others .... Respondents
Mr. Srikanta Kumar Nath, Advocate
on behalf of
Mr. Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra, Advocate
(For Respondent No.1)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
Order No. 24.09.2025
7. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. This I.A. has been filed for condonation of delay of 149 days
in filing the W.A.
3. Mr. Pattnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate
submits that order dated 28th February, 2022 (Annexure-1) passed in
W.P.C (OAC) No.2731 of 2017 is under challenge in this Writ
Appeal. The impugned order under Annexure-1 being passed on
28th February, 2022, the W.A. ought to have been filed on or before
27th March, 2022. But, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court
in the case of RE: Cognizance for extension of imitation, In Re;
(2022) 3 SCC 117, the period of limitation is extended up to 30th
May, 2022. By that time, the High Court was closed due to summer
vacation and re-opened on 20th June, 2022. Thereafter, some delay
occurred in finalization of the draft of the W.A. and it was ultimately
filed on 26th August, 2022.
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 25-Sep-2025 12:42:57 4. It is further submitted that a Coordinate Bench of this Court
in W.A. No.17 of 2023 and batch of W.As involving similar issue,
has set aside the order impugned therein by learned Single Judge
vide judgment dated 15th July, 2025. The ratio in the said case is
squarely applicable to the instant case. Since the Appellants have
fair chance of success in the W.A., delay should be condoned and
W.A. be heard on merit.
5. Mr. Nath, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 without filing
written objection to the limitation petition, argued that delay in filing
the W.A. has not been properly explained. He further submits that it
is a matter of scrutiny as to whether the common judgment in W.A.
No.17 of 2023 and batch of W.As are applicable to the instance case
or not. He, however, submits that the Respondent No.1 has suffered
a lot and is yet to get the benefit of the order impugned herein. He,
therefore, prays for dismissal of the limitation petition and
consequently to dismiss the W.A.
6. Taking note of the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties, this Court finds that there is some delay in filing the
W.A. But, in the meantime, a Coordinate Bench has passed
judgment in W.A. No.17 of 2023 and batch of W.As, where the
order of learned Single Judge involving similar issue has been set
aside.
7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of RE: Cognizance for
extension of imitation, In Re (supra) has held as under:
"5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by
learned counsel and the impact of the surge of the virus
on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the
prevailing conditions, we deem it appropriate to dispose
of the M.A. No. 21 of 2022 with the following directions:
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 25-Sep-2025 12:42:57 I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in
continuation of the subsequent orders dated
08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is
directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till
28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of
limitation as may be prescribed under any general or
special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-
judicial proceedings.
II. Consequently, the balance period of limitation
remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become
available with effect from 01.03.2022.
III. In cases where the limitation would have expired
during period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022,
notwithstanding the actual balance period of
limitation remaining, all persons shall have a
limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the
event the actual balance period of limitation
remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater
than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
IV. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020
till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in
computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23
(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act,
2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other
laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for
instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which
the court or tribunal can condone delay) and
termination of proceedings."
8. Thus, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances
of the case, we condone the delay of 149 days in filing the W.A.
subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand
only) to Respondent No.1 within a period of seven days hence.
9. I.A. is disposed of.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 25-Sep-2025 12:42:57
8. W.A. No. 1155 OF 2022
1. Put up this matter on 17th October, 2025 along with W.A.
No.1133 of 2022 under the heading "Fresh Admission".
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
ms Judge
