Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No.2028 of 2025 Murali Sahu ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Akshaya Kumar Mohapatra -versus- Pabitra Sahu ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. - CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 10.02.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the CMP application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. By filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner, who is defendant in C.S No.24 of 2025, has approached this Court questioning the maintainability of the subsequent suit bearing CS No.24 of 2025 after disposal of the earlier suit bearing CS No.05 of 2019. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the plaintiff in the previous suit, i.e., the CS No.05 of 2019 approached the Civil Court for permanent injunction. A decree was granted in favour of the plaintiff in previous suit, who happens to be Petitioner before this Court. Accordingly, an execution case was Page 2 of 2. initiated at the instance of the decree holder-Petitioner. Therefore, the 3rd parties have filed the subsequent suit bearing CS No.24 of 2025 who were not parties to the earlier suit. Being aggrieved by the filing of the subsequent suit at the instance of the 3rd parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present CMP application thereby questioning the legality and maintainability of the subsequent suit at the instance of the 3rd party in respect of the self-same properties. 5. On a careful consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court is of the view that since the present Petitioner has been arrayed as a defendant to the subsequent suit bearing CS No.24 of 2025, he can always raise a question of maintainability in the subsequent suit. Accordingly, the present CMP application is being disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to raise the question of maintainability in the subsequent suit by filing his written statement. It is needless to mention here that in the event any such issue is raised with regard to the maintainability of the suit, the learned trial court shall do well to consider the same in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the CMP application stands disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer