Orissa High Court
TRP(C)/80/2026 of NIKITA SAHOO Vs JYOTI RANJAN SAHOO on 2 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK TRP(C) No.80 of 2026 Nikita Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. R.N. Prusty, Advocate -versus- Jyoti Ranjan Sahoo …. Opp. Party CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO Order No. ORDER 02.07.2026 (Hybrid Mode) 03. 1. The wife in the marriage is before this
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
TRP(C) No.80 of 2026
Nikita Sahoo
….
Petitioner
Mr. R.N. Prusty, Advocate
-versus-
Jyoti Ranjan Sahoo
….
Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
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
02.07.2026 (Hybrid Mode)
03.
1. The wife in the marriage is before this Court seeking transfer of the C.P. No.922 of 2025 pending before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Kendrapara.
2. The said application has been filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights by the husband in the marriage.
3. After hearing the learned counsel on 06.04.2026, the following order was passed:
“3. Arguing the petition, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner in no uncertain terms that the petitioner wants to resume the matrimony.
4. On being asked, if the wife wants to resumption the matrimony, then what is the point in transferring of the application seeking restitution from learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to learned Judge, Family Court, Kendrapara as the wife can very well inform the Court at Cuttack her stand that she agrees for resumption of the matrimony.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has adjournment to obtain instruction and address further.”
4. The matter was thereafter adjourned at the instance of the petitioner on 30.04.2026. Today the matter being in the list is mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He files memo of date, which states thus:
“The petitioner in the above mentioned case may kindly be permitted to withdraw. The aforesaid case has not pressed.”(sic)
Memo shall be taken on record. Scanned copy be updated.
5. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge Radha Digitally Signed Signed by: RADHARANI JENA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 08-Jul-2026 15:14:11 Signature Not Verified