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

2004 Supreme(Ori) 320

A.S.NAIDU
Parameswar Panda – Appellant
Versus
Adikanda Panda – Respondent


Advocates:
For Petitioner:Mr. S. P. Misra
For Opp. Party No. 1:Mr. A. K. Rath

JUDGMENT

A. S. NAIDU, J. — The moot question which needs determination in this Writ Petition is whether a person who is not a party to a suit but has purchased certain property after the preliminary decree was passed in the suit for partition can be impleaded as a party in the final decree proceeding.

2. The short facts of the case are that the present opposite party No. 1 had filed Title Suit No. 12 of 1990 for partition in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.), Balasore. Judg¬ment and preliminary decree were passed in the suit on 16.11.1992 and 28.11.1992 respectively declaring the shares of the plaintiff and the defendants. Since the parties could not amicably partition the property as per the preliminary decree, the plaintiff initiated final decree proceeding. While the matter stood thus, the present petitioner claiming to have purchased some land from Anadi Panda, a co-sharer (original defendant No. 1, since deceased) by a registered sale deed dated 6.1.1995 filed an application in the final decree proceeding with a prayer before the Court below to direct the survey-knowing commissioner to allot the land purchased by him in his favour. He also filed another petition under Order









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