Orissa High Court
CMP/302/2017 of RAGHUNATH RANA Vs PUJASHREE RANA@KAMILA on 21 August 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.302 of 2017 [CNR No. ODHC010047152017] Raghunath Rana …. Petitioner Mr. Satya S. Kashyap, Advocate -versus- 1. Pujashree Rana @ Kamila 2. Narendra Prasad Rana 3. Sumitra Rana 4. Umamani Rana …. …. Opposite Party Proforma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No.302 of 2017
[CNR No. ODHC010047152017]
Raghunath Rana
….
Petitioner
Mr. Satya S. Kashyap, Advocate
-versus-
1. Pujashree Rana @ Kamila
2. Narendra Prasad Rana
3. Sumitra Rana
4. Umamani Rana
….
….
Opposite Party
Proforma
Opposite Parties
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Order No.
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
21.08.2026
06. (Through Hybrid Mode)
1. This CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 06.02.2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Balasore in RFA No.152 of 2016 allowing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay in presenting the appeal.
2. While allowing the application for condonation of delay, the case was directed to be put up on 16.02.2017 for hearing of the leave application.
3. On 08.05.2017, notice had been issued in the CMP as well as in the Misc. Case but further proceeding in the RFA has not been stayed.
4. Registry has pointed out that notice could not be issued to the Opposite Party No.1 due to non-filing of requisites.
5. Mr. S.S. Kashyap, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for a short adjournment in order to obtain instructions regarding status of the RFA.
6. Since more than nine years have elapsed since the impugned order condoning the delay has been passed and no interim order has been passed by this Court staying further proceeding in the RFA, it can safely be presumed that in the meanwhile either the RFA has been disposed of or has progressed considerably for which no useful purpose would be served by adjourning the CMP and keeping it pending.
7. Hence, the CMP is disposed of.
8. Misc. Case No.339 of 2017 is also disposed of.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge RKS Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJAN KUMAR SETHI Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 21-Aug-2026 19:45:46 Signature Not Verified