Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.625 of 2026 Shankarshana Pujahari @ Pujari ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Abhilash Mishra -versus- Damadar Nayak and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 17.04.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the CMP application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The judgment debtor in Execution Case No.7 of 2025, which arises out of C.S. No.37 of 2022, now pending in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sonepur has approached this Court challenging order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the learned Executing Court. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Opposite Parties as plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of right, title, interest and for permanent injunction and for partition. He further submitted that the suit was decreed ex-parte. After coming to know about the decree the present Petitioner moved an application under Order-9 Rule-13 of CPC for setting aside such ex-parte decree. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that Page 2 of 2. during the pendency of the application under Order-9 Rule-13 of CPC before the original court an execution proceeding was levied at the instance of the plaintiff which was registered as Execution Case No.7 of 2025. He further contended that during the pendency of the application under Order-9 Rule-13 of CPC the learned Executing Court is proceeding with the execution proceeding. Accordingly, the Petitioner wanted to file an objection in the execution case. However, such prayer seeking time to file the objection has been rejected by the learned trial Court by virtue of the impugned order dated 06.03.2026. 6. On perusal of order dated 06.03.2026, it appears that the prayer of the Petitioner for grant of time has been rejected and nothing has been mentioned with regard to the objection. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 06.03.2026 does not call for any interference. However, while disposing of the present application, this Court grants two weeks’ time to the Petitioner to file his objection in the execution case. In the event any such objection is filed, the same shall be accepted and considered in accordance with law and every endeavor shall be made to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible after providing opportunity of hearing to both sides. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the CMP application stands disposed of. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout