High CourtsSingle Bench(2002) 08 OHC CK 0051

Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Iswar Chandra Sahu, Rengali Irrigation Project

Orissa High Court · Decided on 16 August 2002 · Citation: (2002) 2 OLR 340

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.P. Das, J
CASE NUMBER
F.A. No. 215 of 1999

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 192 words

B.P. Das, J.—Heard Shri Sangram Das, Addl. Standing Counsel for the appellant.

2.

This mater was placed before this Court on the basis of the order dated 7.8.2002 by which the Registrar (Judicial) declined to admit the appeal on the ground of not depositing the decretal amount in terms of Order 41, Rule 1 (3), C.P.C. On a conjoint reading of Order 41, Rule 1(3) and Order 41, Rule 5(5), C.P.C., the irresistible conclusion is that deposit of decretal amount is not pre-requisite for admitting the appeal. The consequence of non-compliance of Order 41, Rule 1 (3), C.P.C. can only result in not granting the stay of execution of the decree. That apart, under Order 27, Rule 8-A. no security is required from Government or public officer in certain cases. Here, the appellant is the Government. So, Order 27. Rule 8(A), C.P.C. Is squarely applicable. The appeal is admitted. Requisites for issue of notice to the respondent to be filed within 7 days.

3.

The order passed by the Registrar (Judicial) seems to be the outcome of non-application of mind and without going through the provisions of the C.P.C. governing the field.