SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Ori) 19

R.N.MISRA
CHINTAMANI BHANJA – Appellant
Versus
GOKULA CHANDRA BHANJA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.DAS, G.S.SAHU, K.C.SATHPATHY, S.MANTRY, S.MISRA

R. N. MISRA, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS application by defendant No. 1 in a suit for permanent injunction calls in question the order dated 12-2-79 passed by the Munsif, Banki, by which he has rejected an application of the defendant that the suit has abated In view of Section 4 (4) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff claimed a decree for permanent injunction against the defendants by claiming title in himself Defendant No. 1 alone entered contest by filing a written statement on 13th April, 1973 wherein challenge to the title claimed by the appellant was raised, An application was made by defendant No. 1 that the suit has abated in view of the fact that the lands come within the village covered by the consolidation notification. The learned Munsif did not accept the assertion of defendant and held that the suit does not abate,

( 3 ) SECTION 4 (4) of the Act provides:--

"every suit and proceedings for declaration of any right or interest in any land situate within the consolidation area in regard to which proceedings could be or ought to be started under this Act which is pending before any Civil Court, whether of t







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top