Orissa High Court
CMP/1367/2015 of PRASANNA KUMAR DAS Vs SUSIL MOHANTY on 22 July 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 1367 of 2015 1. Prasanna Kumar Das 2. Udaya Gowda … Petitioners Mr. Chitta Ranjan Mishra, Advocate On behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishna Behera, Advocate -versus- 1. Susil Mohanty 2. Narasingha Gowda 3. Kangali Gowda 4. Surendra Gowda …
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No. 1367 of 2015
1. Prasanna Kumar Das
2. Udaya Gowda
…
Petitioners
Mr. Chitta Ranjan Mishra, Advocate
On behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishna Behera, Advocate
-versus-
1. Susil Mohanty
2. Narasingha Gowda
3. Kangali Gowda
4. Surendra Gowda
…
Opp. Parties
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pradhan, Advocate
(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.
22.07.2026
05. (Through hybrid Mode)
1. This CMP has been filed by the Petitioners who are the Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2 in C.S. No. 90 of 2006, challenging the common order dated 08.05.2015, rejecting their applications (CMA No. 03 of 2015 and CMA No. 04 of 2015) for further cross-examination of the P.W. No.1 and P.W. No.2.
2. Mr. Chitta Ranjan Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishna Behera, learned counsel for the Petitioners files a memo signed by Mr. Gopal Krishna Behera where it is stated that as per instructions the matter may be disposed of as not pressed being infructuous. The said memo is taken on record.
3. Perusal of the order dated 08.05.2015 reveals that CMA No. 03 of 2015 and CMA No. 04 of 2015 had been filed under Section 151 of the C.P.C. to recall the orders dated 27.01.2015 and 04.02.2015 respectively. The applications have been rejected on the ground that when P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined on behalf of the plaintiff, the defendant did not prefer to cross-examine them for which the cross-examination was declined.
4. On 30.10.2015 while issuing notice on the question of admission, further proceeding in C.S. No. 90 of 2006 pending before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chhatrapur had been stayed till the next date.
5. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pradhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1 submits that he is not aware of the present status of the suit.
6. In view of the memo filed by the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the CMP is dismissed as infructuous.
7. As no reason has been indicated as to why the CMP has become infructuous, liberty is granted to the Petitioners to file puspa an application within a period of four weeks from today for recall of this order and revival of this case, if cause of action still survives.
8. Copy of this order be communicated to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chhatrapur forthwith. It is open to the learned Judge to submit a report regarding status of C.S. No. 90 of 2006 by 06.08.2026.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 22-Jul-2026 16:29:31 Signature Not Verified