Orissa High Court
CMP/1582/2016 of PURNA CHANDRA SETHI Vs RABINDRA SETHI on 31 August 2026
of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.1582 of 2016 [CNR No.- ODHC010377242016] 1. Purna Chandra Sethi 2. Anup Kumar Sethi 3. Binod Kumar Sethi 4. Bijay Kumar Sethi …. Petitioners None -versus- 1. Rabindra Sethi 2. Rama Chandra Sethi 3. Laxman Sethi 4. Gabi Sethi 5. Tahasildar,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No.1582 of 2016
[CNR No.- ODHC010377242016]
1. Purna Chandra Sethi
2. Anup Kumar Sethi
3. Binod Kumar Sethi
4. Bijay Kumar Sethi
….
Petitioners
None
-versus-
1. Rabindra Sethi
2. Rama Chandra Sethi
3. Laxman Sethi
4. Gabi Sethi
5. Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack
6. Executive Officer, Cuttack
Municipality
7. SDO, Electrical, Sishubhawan,
District-Cuttack
8. Babu @ Siba Prasad Sethi
9. Sanku @ Sankar Sethi
10. Menaka Sethi
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, AGA
Mr. P.K. Behera, Advocate
on behalf of Mr. Debasis Nayak, Advocate (for O.P. No.6)
None
(for O.P. No. 1)
CORAM:
HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Order No.
10. 31.08.2026
(Through hybrid Mode)
1. This CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 01.10.2016 passed by the learned 1st Additional Civil Judge (Sr.
Division), Cuttack in T.S. No. 37/2003 (Annexure-1), rejecting the application filed under Order 18 Rule 1 of the CPC by the plaintiffs-Petitioners to direct the defendants to begin their evidence prior to the plaintiffs.
2. While issuing notice on 25.10.2016, further proceeding in C.S. No. 37 of 2003 had been stayed by this Court.
3. Registry has referred to the postal tracking report in respect of Opposite Party No.5. Opposite Party No.5 is the Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack. The report reveals that the notice has been delivered to the addressee.
4. On 20.08.2026 when the matter was taken up, this Court had called for a report from the learned 1st Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Cuttack regarding present status of the suit and whether the suit has proceeded after the impugned order was passed on 01.10.2016.
5. Report dated 25.08.2026 of the learned 1st Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Cuttack reveals that the case record in T.S. No. 37 of 2003 has been transferred to the Court of the learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Cuttack which has already intimated vide letter dated 25.08.2026.
6. Relevant portion of the report dated 28.08.2026 of the learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Cuttack, I/c is reproduced below: “With reference to the letter and subject cited supra I am to intimate that in view of impugned order dtd. 01.10.2016, there is no further proceeding in T.S No. 37/2003 till 16.02.2019. On 16.02.2019, this court vacated the stay in proceeding. On 07.07.2022, the defendants were set ex-parte. On 01.08.2022, one witness, namely, Harihar Sethi was examined by this court as P.W. 1. Another witness, namely, Binod Kumar Sethi was examined by this court as P.W. 2. The case record was posted for ex-parte argument since 03.12.2022. On 30.06.2026, this court issued letter regarding present status of the suit and after receiving the intimation regarding present status of the suit from Hon'ble High Court, the further proceeding in this case is stayed. Now, the case record has been posted to 03.10.2026 awaiting intimation.”
7. From the report it appears that after the stay was vacated on 07.07.2022, the defendants have been set ex parte and on 01.08.2022 two witnesses namely, Harihar Sethi and Binod Kumar Sethi have been examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 respectively and the case was posted for ex parte argument since puspa 03.12.2022. But thereafter after receiving intimation from the High Court, the case is still pending and further proceeding this this case had been stayed and the case is posted to 03.10.2026 awaiting intimation.
8. In view of the fact that the defendants have been set ex parte and two witnesses have already been examined by the plaintiffs, it is not necessary to keep the CMP pending to consider the application of the plaintiffs for directing the defendants to adduce evidence first.
9. Hence the CMP is dismissed.
10. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.
11. Misc. Case No. 1665 of 2016 stands disposed of.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 31-Aug-2026 18:34:22 Signature Not Verified