Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.1574 of 2025 Banamali Muduli ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Tusar Kumar Mishra -versus- Rania Bisoi & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 30.04.2026 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the CMP application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. By filing the present CMP application, the defendant in C.S. No.95 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Civil Jude, Junior Division, Puri, has approached this Court by filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, thereby challenging order dated 11.09.2025, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the plaintiff’s application filed under Order 13 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the CPC. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the defendant wanted to call for a registered sale deed in support of his contention. He further submitted that such sale deed has though has been pleaded in the plaint, however, he did Page 2 of 3. not have a copy of such document since the defendant was unable to get a certified copy of such document. However, since the document was relevant to establish the case of the defendant against the plaintiff, the defendant moved the aforesaid application with request the trial court to call for such documents from the Office of the District Sub-Registrar, Puri. Such application having been rejected by virtue of the impugned order dated 11.09.2025, the plaintiff has approached this Court by filing the present CMP application. 5. On perusal of the impugned order dated 11.09.2025, it appears that the learned trial court has rejected the application of the plaintiff under Order 13 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the CPC on the ground that the same is premature and as such the same is not maintainable. Such rejection is supported by the reason that at the moment the witnesses from the plaintiff side has been examined. Therefore, there is no occasion to call for such document at this stage. 6. Taking into consideration the finding of the learned trial court, this Court is of the view that the learned trial court has not committed any illegality which would call for interference of this Court with order dated 11.09.2025. Accordingly, while disposing of the present CMP application, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to move an application under Orde 13 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC upon closure of the evidence from the side of the plaintiff before commencement of the evidence from the side of the defendants. In such eventuality, the learned Page 3 of 3. trial court shall consider the same afresh by providing opportunity of hearing to both sides and without being influenced by order dated 11.09.2025. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the CMP application stands disposed of. (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Rubi