SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

ORISSA HIGH COURT
PANCHANAN SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
SARAT CH.SAHOO – Respondent


Advocates:
['M/S PRASANTA KU SAHOO', '', 'L N PATEL', 'B K RAGADA', 'H P RAUTA']

2. 27.11.2020

Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is

taken up through Videoconferencing.

2.

Petitioner, in this CMP seeks to assail the

order dated 16.04.202016.04.2019 (Annexure-5) passed

by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar in CS

No.151 of 2008, whereby he held the order passed

under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC to be infructuous due to

non-cooperation of the defendants in depositing the cost

for police assistance for which, the Court Commissioner

is not in a position to execute the writ issued under

Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC.

3.

Mr.Sahoo,

learned

counsel

for

the

petitioner submits that the petitioner is defendant No.1

in the aforesaid Suit. He along with defendant No.2 filed

a petition dated 10.03.2010 under Order XXVI Rule 9

CPC for appointment of Survey knowing Commissioner.

Although initially learned trial Court allowed the

petition by appointing a Survey knowing Commissioner

but subsequently recalled the same by order dated

20.09.2010 suo motu. Challenging the said order of

recall dated 20.09.2010, the petitioner filed W.P.(C)

No.19124 of 2010 before this Court, which was disposed

of on 26.11.2010 setting a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top