Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Preiest Prabhudhan vs Rkl.Parish Council on 18 April, 2023

Author: R.K.Pattanaik

Bench: R.K.Pattanaik

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                    RSA No. 613 of 2003
            Preiest Prabhudhan                     ....              Appellant
                                        Mr. Ramkakanta Mohanty, Sr.Advocate
                                                   Miss S.Mohanty, Advocate

                                           -Versus-

            RKL.Parish Council                         ....           Respondent
                                                            Ms. S. Mishra, ASC
                                        Mr. S.B.Jena, Advocate for Respondents


                           CORAM:
                           JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

                                          ORDER
Order No.                               18.04.2023


  10.       1.       Mr. Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate appears for

appellant No. 1(a) as well as appellant Nos. 2 & 3.

2. As per the S.R., notices vis-à-vis respondent Nos. 6,16,17,18 & 20 by Court process have been received back after personal service. None has appeared in response to the said notices. As a result, the service of notice as against the above respondents is held to be sufficient.

3. As against respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5,7,8,9, 11 to 13, Mr. Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate for the appellants submits that the said respondents are the purchasers of the original plaintiff whose suit was dismissed and in so far as the appeal is concerned, it is against the counter claim of defendant No.4 therein. With the above submission, Mr. Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate pleads for dispensing with issuance of fresh notice against the said respondents. Considering the above facts, the Court dispenses with issuance of notice to respondents Nos. 3, 4, 5,7,8,9, 11 to 13. Similarly, notices Page 1 of 2 vis-à-vis respondent Nos.14,15,19 being the purchasers of the original plaintiff are hereby exempted.

4. Since the suit was dismissed and despite notice issued to respondent No.1 (original plaintiff), he has not responded, fresh notice against him is also dispensed with moreover the process server's report has returned back with an endorsement 'expired'.

5. In respect of respondent No.2, Mr. D.R. Bhokta has instructions to appear for him and he undertakes to file Vakalatnama in course of the day.

(R.K.Pattanaik) Judge I.A. No. 230 of 2023

11. 1. Mr. Bhokta, learned counsel who is to appear for and on behalf of respondent No.2 prays for an adjournment to file objection to the I.A.

2. At the above request, time is allowed.

3. List on 4th May, 2023 for filing objection, if any by respondent No. 2.

4. Interim order passed earlier shall remain in force till the next date of listing.

(R.K.Pattanaik) Judge Kabita