M/S. ANJU MACHINERY CO. , KHURDA v. PRAKASH PATTNAIK
CMP/858/2025 · 2025-06-20
K R Mohapatra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 39744 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 39744 (ORI) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No.858 of 2025
M/S. Anju Machinery Co., Khurda and Another …. Petitioners Mr.Anup Kumar Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus- Prakash Pattnaik …. Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 20.06.2025
01.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioners, in this CMP, seeks to assail the order dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure-3) passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar in Execution Case No.24 of 2015 whereby he has posted the matter to 23rd June, 2025 for issuance of writ of auction sale.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that challenging the ex parte decree, the Petitioner has filed RFA No.87 of 2018, which is pending before the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar. The said RFA was dismissed for non-prosecution, against which the Petitioners moved this Court in CMP No.534 of 2025. This Court vide order dated 08.05.2025 disposed of the CMP with a direction to restore RFA No.87 of 2018 for disposal in accordance with law. The Appeal is posted to 30th June, 2025 p. 2 and it is directed that the interim application shall be heard on appearance of the Respondents therein.
3.1. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that since the Execution Case is posted to 23rd June, 2025 for issuance of writ in the matter of auction sale, the Petitioners finding no other alternative has filed the CMP for the aforesaid relief.
4. Taking into consideration the submission made by the
learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court finds that the Petitioner has not yet moved the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar for ex parte hearing of the interim application stated to have been filed for stay of further proceeding of the Execution Case. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain this CMP at this stage.
5. Accordingly, the CMP is disposed of with a direction that if any application for ex parte hearing of the interim application is filed by filing an application to advance the date of posting, the same may be considered in accordance with law.
6. Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
Himansu