Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9367 (ORI)

PRATAP CHANDRA BEHERA v. PAWAN KUMAR SULTANIA

CMAPL/13/2026 · 2026-03-18

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMAPL No.13 of 2026 Pratap Chandra Behera ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - M/s Susanta Kumar Jethy, S.k.mishra -versus- pawan kumar sultania ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 18.03.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the CMAPL application. 3. By filing the present CMAPL application, the petitioner in CMP No.1188 of 2025 has prayed for restoration of the CMP application which was dismissed due to non-prosecution vide order dated 09.01.2026 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. 4. On perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-1 it appears that since none appeared before the learned coordinate Bench on the first date of hearing itself, the CMP application was dismissed due to non-prosecution without issuing notice to the Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the Petitioner has filed this application within the period of limitation. Since the CMP application was dismissed Page 2 of 2. due to non-prosecution before issuing notice to the Opposite Parties, this Court is of the concerned view that no notice is required to be issued to the Opposite Parties. Hence, impugned order dated 09.01.2026 is set aside subject to payment of a cost of Rs.500/- to the Advocates’ Welfare Fund. 5. Accordingly, it is directed that the CMP application be restored to file and placed before the assigned Bench. 6. The CMAPL stands disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Sisir Designation: Personal Assistant