IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.1730 of 2016 [CNR No.- ODHC010234862016 ] 1. Jyotikanta Panda 2. Bibhuti Prasad Panda …. Petitioners Ms. Debabala Nayak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B. Panigrahi, Advocate -versus- 1. Mahesh @ Maheswar Ratha 2. Nigamananda Ratha 3. Mantu Ratha 4. Prem @ Premananda Ratha …. Opp. Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 06. 10.09.2026 (Through hybrid Mode) 1. This CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 05.11.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bargarh in C.S. No. 50 of 2011 (Annexure-4), rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC for amendment of the plaint. 2. While issuing notice on 22.11.2016, this Court had stayed further proceeding in the suit. 3. On 29.08.2026, prayer for adjournment had been made on behalf of learned counsel for the Petitioner to obtain instructions. On the same day, a report had been called for from the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bargarh regarding present status of Civil Suit No. 50 of 2011 and if there have been any developments in the suit after 05.11.2016. 4. Ms. Debabala Nayak, learned counsel is present on behalf of Mr. B. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the Petitioners and submits that they have not been able to contact the Petitioners and obtain instructions. 5. Note of the Registry indicates that A.D. has been received from Opposite Parties No. 1 to 4 after valid service. But no counsel has appeared on their behalf. 6. Report dated 03.09.2026, has been received from the learned Civil Judge, Bargarh where it has been stated that the proceedings in the suit had been stayed pursuant to stay order passed by the High Court. But in view of the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of the Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency and Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, the record was posted on 01.09.2021 for appearance of the Parties thereafter the matter has proceeded. On 09.03.2022, evidence of P.W.2 was recorded, P.W.3 was examined on 07.09.2023 and cross-examined on 03.10.2023. On 07.11.2023 evidence from the side of the plaintiff was closed. The substitution of defendant No.1 Mahesh @ Maheswar Ratha has been allowed on 24.09.2024. The matter had been sent for mediation on 04.07.2026 but D.L.S.A., Bargarh vide letter dated 01.08.2026, had intimated the court regarding failure of mediation. On 14.08.2026, defendant No.3 has been examined as D.W.1 and now the case is posted to 05.09.2026 for further cross- examination of D.W.1. 7. In view of the fact that after passing of the impugned order on 05.11.2016, the suit has proceeded and evidence of the plaintiff has been completed, recording of evidence on behalf of the defendants have commenced and deceased defendant No. 1 Mahesh @ Maheswar Ratha who is Opposite Party No.1 in this CMP has not been substituted, I am not inclined to entertain this CMP which is accordingly dismissed. 8. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated. 9. Misc. Case No. 1826 of 2016 stands disposed of. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Madhusmita