Kumar Malik vs Bhubaneswari Mishra And Another

R.K. Pattanaik, J

Heard Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant.

Instantappeal is filed by the claimant appellant challenging the impugned order dated 6thOctober, 2015 in CMA No1 of 2013, whereby,a request for restoration in exercise on jurisdiction Section 151 C.P.Cvis-à-vis CMA No.300 of 2001 and Misc. Case No.1165 of 1990 was dismissed followed by a nil award.

Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the date was not correctly noted down by the learned counsel engaged in Misc. Case No.1165 of 1990, as a result of which, the same was dismissed with the nil award but then request for restoration filed through CMA No.300 of 2001 was not entertained and again disallowed vide Annexure-1.

The claimant appellant is seeking for compensation account of injury sustained during the vehicle accident.

Considering the submission of Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant and the reason stated to satisfythe Court about the default, it is of the view that the matter should be disposed of at the stage of admission with the impugned decision under Annexure-1 and order in CMA No.300 of 2001 set aside in order to restore the original proceeding in Misc. Case No.1165 of 1990 for a decision on merit as the samewould serve the purpose and meet the ends of justice.

Hence, it is ordered.

In the result, the writ petition stands allowed. Consequently, the impugned order under Annexure-1 in CMA No.1 of 2013 and the decision in CMA No.300 of 2001 are hereby set aside restoring the original proceeding in Misc. Case No.1165 of 1990 to file for its disposal by learned 4th MACT, Puri as per and in accordance with law.

Urgent copy of this order be issued as per rules.

......……………………………