Page 1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4080 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.8579 of 2016)

MIHIR RANJAN PARIDA                         APPELLANT                                        VERSUS

MENJA NAIK AND ORS.     RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T                        KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted. 2. The  limited  prayer  made  by  the  appellant  is  for  expunction of certain adverse observations made by the High  Court against the appellant who is the  presiding Judge on the  trial side.  When the matter came up before this Court on 29th  March, 2016, this Court issued notice on the following terms:

“Permission  to  file  special  leave  petition  is   granted.    Issue notice.     Dasti, in addition, is permitted.

Mr.  Raju  Ramachandran,  learned  senior  counsel  submits that he may be permitted to withdraw ground  (D) of the petition.

On request, the permission is granted. The limited prayer made by the learned senior  

counsel  is  only  for  expunction  of  the  adverse  observations  made  by  the  High  Court  against  the  petitioner.  Since it is a matter of expunction, we  deem it appropriate to issue notice.

Page 2

- 2 - However,  we  make  it  clear  that  in  case  

respondents have no objection with regard to the  limited  prayer  for  expunction  of  the  adverse  observations  made  by  the  High  Court  against  the  petitioner,  they  are  free  not  to  respond  to  the  notice as well.

Post on 18.04.2016.”

3. It is seen that the notice has already been served  on  respondents  but  there  is  no  appearance  on  their  behalf.

4. Having heard the learned senior counsel appearing  for the appellant, we are of the view that the adverse  observations  made  against  the  appellant  are  wholly  unwarranted.  May be the Judge passed a wrong order; but  that  does  not  mean  that  even  wrong  order  should  be  visited  with  such  adverse  remarks.   All  adverse  remarks/observations against the appellant contained in  the impugned order are hence expunged.

4. The appeal is allowed.

...............J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]

...............J. [R. BANUMATHI]

NEW DELHI; APRIL 18, 2016