LOKANATH PATTANAIK Vs. SANJAY KUMAR RATSINGH & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed assailing the order dated 2.5.2018, vide Anenxure-1 thereby rejecting an attempt of O.P.1 therein, the petitioner herein with a prayer to summon the Director of concerned Zone of Orami Service Cooperative Society for production of documents involving the petitioner therein, Sri Lokanath Pattanaik and for appropriate evidence. Rejection of such application gave rise to a cause of action in favour of the present petitioner to approach this Court.

(2.) Assailing the impugned order, Sri S.S.Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner taking this court to the grounds contained in the application considered therein and the dispute involved in the Election Case contended that both calling of the loan document as well as the deposition of evidence involving the loan concerning Lokanath Pattnaik is relevant for the purpose of effective adjudication of the Election dispute involved herein. Taking this Court to the ground of rejection by the trial court, Sri Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even assuming that the petitioner had got the scope of calling for the document and having a scope of evidence through the witness already examined in oaths considering effective adjudication of the Election dispute, the trial court would have given an opportunity of recalling the witnesses already examined for the purpose involved herein. It is thus contended that the impugned order becomes bad and unless the impugned order is interfered with and the petitioner is provided with an opportunity of calling for the loan document and leading evidence in the said regard through the witnesses already examined, the petitioner will be seriously prejudiced and there may not be any effective trial of the Election dispute involved herein.

(3.) To his opposition, Sri S.N.Das, learned counsel for the contesting opposite party bringing the stage of the proceeding at the relevant moment contended that not only the petitioner lacked in making such endeavours through the witnesses already examined but looking to the situation that the Election proceeding is pending at argument stage providing such opportunity at this stage of the matter will be affecting the contesting opposite party and the attempt of the petitioner appears to be an attempt to linger the disposal of the Election dispute.