IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 1037 of 2016 Gouri Biswal @ Gori Biswal and 2 … Petitioners Others None -versus- Kalakar Biswal … Opp. Party None CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 29.07.2026 06. (Through hybrid Mode) 1. The CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 20.04.2016 passed in I.A. No. 96/2016 arising out of Civil Suit No.53/2016 by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pattamundai rejecting the application filed by the defendants under Order 39 Rule 7 of the CPC. 2. None appears for the Petitioners or the Opposite Party when the matter is called. 3. On 05.08.2016 while issuing notice, the Petitioners had been granted liberty to file an application seeking adjournment of the suit for at least fifteen days and it had been directed that if such application is filed, the suit would be adjourned for at least fifteen days. Thereafter the interim order has not been extended. Page 1 of 2 4. As more than 10 years have elapsed since the impugned order was passed, it can safely be presumed that in the meanwhile, the suit has been disposed of. 5. Hence, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the CMP pending, which is accordingly dismissed. 6. Liberty is granted to the Petitioners for revival of the suit/ recall of this order, in case, cause of action still survives. (Savitri Ratho) Judge puspa Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication

Location: Orissa High Court Date: 29-Jul-2026 19:17:08 Page 2 of 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 1037 of 2016 Gouri Biswal @ Gori Biswal and 2 … Petitioners Others None -versus- Kalakar Biswal … Opp. Party None CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 29.07.2026 06. (Through hybrid Mode) 1. The CMP has been filed challenging the order dated 20.04.2016 passed in I.A. No. 96/2016 arising out of Civil Suit No.53/2016 by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pattamundai rejecting the application filed by the defendants under Order 39 Rule 7 of the CPC. 2. None appears for the Petitioners or the Opposite Party when the matter is called. 3. On 05.08.2016 while issuing notice, the Petitioners had been granted liberty to file an application seeking adjournment of the suit for at least fifteen days and it had been directed that if such application is filed, the suit would be adjourned for at least fifteen days. Thereafter the interim order has not been extended. Page 1 of 2 4. As more than 10 years have elapsed since the impugned order was passed, it can safely be presumed that in the meanwhile, the suit has been disposed of. 5. Hence, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the CMP pending, which is accordingly dismissed. 6. Liberty is granted to the Petitioners for revival of the suit/ recall of this order, in case, cause of action still survives. (Savitri Ratho) Judge puspa Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication

Location: Orissa High Court Date: 29-Jul-2026 19:17:08 Page 2 of 2