Ex-Parte Ad Interim Order Of Status-Quo Can't Be Granted Once Petition Under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC Is Rejected: Orrisa HC

The Orissa High Court has observed that trial court cannot grant ex-parte ad-interim order of status quo once a petition under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC is rejected.

The Court was considering a petition challenging an order whereby the Court though rejected a petition under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC, but exercising inherent power under Section 151 CPC, directed the parties to maintain status quo over the suit property.

The single-bench of Justice K.R. Mohapatra observed, "....this Court is of the considered opinion that when learned trial Court rejected the petition under order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC, it should not have exercised inherent power under Section 151 CPC to pass an ex-parte ad interim order of status quo."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Bibhu Prasad Mishra.

The Counsel for the Petitioner relied upon the case of Meena Kumari Bhagat -v- Smt. Kuntala Nayak and others, reported in 2016 (I) CLR 625, to submit that once a petition under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC is rejected, the Court should not have exercised its discretion in granting ex parte ad interim order of status quo. In the meantime, the Petitioner had already entered appearance, but in view of the settled law, the impugned order under Annexure-4 is not sustainable and is liable to be set-aside.

The Petition was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Lipika Patra vs. Subrat Kumar Samal and Another 

Click here to read/ download Order: