Back
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Goura Mohan Mohanta – Appellant
Versus
Basa Soren – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for filing cmapl for readmission (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. preference for substantial justice over technicalities (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. cmapl allowed; 2nd appeal restored (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Civil Misc. Application under Order41, Rule 19 of the CPC, 1908 has been filed by the petitioners (those were the appellants in the Second Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) against the Opposite Parties (those were the respondents in the Second Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) praying for readmission of the S.A. No.85 of 1999 which was dismissed on dated 10.01.2024 for the default of the appellants (petitioners).
Thereafter, on dated 19.01.2024, the appellants of the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999 being the petitioners filed this CMAPL under Order 41, Rule 19 of the CPC, 1908 for readmission of that 2nd Appeal after setting aside its dismissal order dated 10.01.2024 stating the aforesaid grounds for hearing of the same on merit or else they (petitioners) shall be prejudiced seriously and sustain irreparable loss, because, the petitioners (Appellants in the 2nd Appeal vide S.A. No.85 of 1999) are interested for hearing of that 2nd Appeal on merit.
3. It appears from
Court emphasized that substantial justice prevails over technical grounds, allowing for readmission of an appeal dismissed for the absent appearance of counsel.
Parties should not suffer for counsel's inadvertent mistakes, and uncontroverted affidavit claims must be accepted, reinforcing principles of natural justice.
The court ruled that the non-appearance due to the death of the appellant and counsel did not constitute deliberate fault, warranting restoration of the appeal to ensure justice and uphold civil righ....
The Civil Procedure Code's function is to ensure fair hearings on merits, not to dismiss cases based on technical defaults.
The court emphasized that parties cannot take advantage of the dismissal of an appeal for want of prosecution and allowed the applications filed by the appellants to restore the status quo ante in th....
The court affirmed that once leave under Section 92 of the C.P.C. is granted and confirmed, it cannot be revoked without merit, highlighting procedural preclusion against repetitive challenges.
Misapplication of procedural rules, specifically regarding adjournments and stay orders, which led to the dismissal of an appeal on merit without due process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
