Orissa High Court
CMP/880/2016 of GANESH PATRA Vs SRI SRI ESWAR GOPALJEW @ GOPALJEW THAKURA on 27 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 880 of 2016 1. Sri Ganesh Patra 2. Sri Basanta Parida 3. Subrat Giri 4. Radhakanta Giri 5. Arun Kumar Pradhan … Petitioners None -versus- 1. Sri Sri Eswar Gopaljew @ Gopaljew Thakura Bije Nijagaon 2. Sri Sudhasu Panda 3. Smt. Hemalata
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No. 880 of 2016
1. Sri Ganesh Patra
2. Sri Basanta Parida
3. Subrat Giri
4. Radhakanta Giri
5. Arun Kumar Pradhan
…
Petitioners
None
-versus-
1. Sri Sri Eswar Gopaljew @ Gopaljew
Thakura Bije Nijagaon
2. Sri Sudhasu Panda
3. Smt. Hemalata Panda
4. Sri Udaya Panda
5. Sri Chandan Panda
6. Sri Narayan @ Narana Panda
7. Sri Udayasakar Das
8. Sri Debasish Panda
9. Sri Uttam Kumar Panda
10. Srikanta Pradhan
11. Sri Ananta Kumar Das
12. Sri Chirajan Senapati
…
Opp. Parties
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.
27.07.2026
04. (Through hybrid Mode)
1. The matter had been passed over as no counsel appeared on behalf of the Petitioners when the matter was called.
2. When the matter is called again after recess, none appears on behalf of the Petitioners.
3. The CMP has been filed for a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jaleswar to dispose of Interim puspa Application No. 54 of 2016 arising out of C.S. No. 132/2016 within a stipulated period.
4. Notice in the matter had been issued on 08.06.2016 and in Misc. Case No. 881 of 2016, it had been directed that status quo as on date in respect of the disputed property shall be maintained by the parties and that pendency of the CMP shall not stand as a bar for final conclusion of the Interim Application No. 54 of 2016.
5. Office note indicates that notice could not be issued to Opposite Parties due to non-filing of requisites.
6. Since no counsel appears on behalf of the Petitioners and requisites for issue of notice on Opposite Parties has not been filed, it is apparent that the Petitioners have no interest in pursuing this CMP and in the meanwhile, Interim Application No. 54 of 2016 must have been disposed of rendering this CMP infructuous.
7. No useful purpose would therefore be served by keeping the matter pending. So the CMP is dismissed.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 27-Jul-2026 18:18:18 Signature Not Verified