IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 1314 of 2016 [ CNR No. ODHC010223802016 ] Ghantaram Patel @ Naik …. Petitioner Ms. D. Sahoo, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate -versus- 1. Hemanta Kumr Dehury 2. Lalu Munda …. …. Opp. Party Proforma Opp. Party Mr. S. Ray, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.K. Nayak, Advocate (for O.P. No.1) CORAM: THE HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 28.08.2026 (Through Hybrid Mode) 10. 1. This CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 08.08.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sundargarh in Civil Suit No. 01 of 2012, rejecting the application filed by the defendant No.2, under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC for amendment of the written statement. 2. While issuing notice on 07.09.2016, this Court had stayed further proceedings in the suit. 3. Pursuant to order dated 19.08.2026, report dated 24.08.2026 of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sundargarh has been received, where the entire history of the civil suit has been indicated and it has been specifically stated that although the High Court has been pleased to stay further proceeding in the suit, on 18.02.2022, in view of the principles enumerated by the Supreme Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. -Vrs- C.B.I., the stay order was vacated and on 07.03.2022 and on 27.09.2022, the petition filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was allowed subject to payment of cost and on 21.02.2023, the defendant No.3 has filed written statement -cum- counter claim along with an application for exempting her from filing Court fees. On 17.07.2023, the consolidated plaint was accepted and on 11.09.2023, the written statement -cum- counter claim filed by the defendant No.3 was accepted and the case was posted for filing written statement to the counter claim. On 24.07.2024, as written statement to the counter claim was not filed the plaintiff was precluded from filing the same. As in spite of being granted opportunities defendant No.3 did not remove the defects in the counter claim nor did she appear, for which on 16.12.2025, the counter claim has been rejected and the case was posted for substitution of deceased defendant No.2, basing upon an intimation filed by defendant No.3 by a memo regarding his death. On 19.01.2026, time petition was filed by the plaintiff for taking steps for substitution of defendant No.2, on the ground of illness. Since no medical documents were placed on record and as the record is of the year 2012, time petition filed by the plaintiff was rejected and suit stood abated against defendant No.2. The parties have been directed to appear for trial on 24.03.2026, 15.04.2026, 25.06.2026, 14.08.2026 and lastly 18.09. 2026, where plaintiff has been given last chance to produce his witness. 4. Mr. S. Ray, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. B.K. Nayak, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.1(a) to 1(c), submits that he does not have any instructions in the case and files a memo to that effect. The same is taken on record. 5. In view of the report of the learned trial Court that the suit has abated against defendant No.2 who is the Petitioner in this CMP, no useful purpose will be served by keeping this CMP pending. 6. Hence, the CMP is disposed of. 7. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated. 8. Misc. Case No. 1349 of 2016 and Misc. Case No. 1690 of 2016 stand disposed of. 9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Sukanta Designation: Senior Stenographer