IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.2017 of 2025 Mahendra Mishra …. Petitioner Mr. S. Subham, Advocate -versus- Sumitra Mishra & others …. Opp. Parties CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 05.02.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein. 4. By filing the present CMP under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the 3rd party intervener in T.S. No.217 of 2000 has approached this Court by challenging the inaction of the learned trial Court to dispose of their application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC to be impleaded as parties to the Suit. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset contended that T.S. No.217 of 2000 has been filed at the instance of opposite party no.1-plaintiff for partition of the joint family properties. He further submitted that the Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 10-Feb-2026 11:36:23 Signature Not Verified 2 amit present petitioner being the co-sharer of the suit scheduled property has substantial interest over the suit scheduled property. However, he was left out by the plaintiff from the original plaint. Accordingly, an application was filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC on 11.09.2015 at Annexure-1. He further submitted that though the application was filed in the year 2015, however, the same has not been taken up and decided. Being aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present CMP application for a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC. 6. Taking into consideration the limited nature of grievance of the petitioner, this Court directs the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baripada, Mayurbhanj to consider the application of the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC , if the same is still pending, and dispose of the same as expeditiously asp possible preferably within a period of two months by passing a speaking order after giving opportunity of hearing to all parties. Parties are directed to cooperate with the learned trial Court. If the opposite parties are aggrieved by this order, liberty is granted to them to seek variation of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the CMP is disposed of. Web copy of this order be acted upon by all concerned. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge