JUDGMENT :

In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners being the legal representatives of the original defendant no.4 coming to be substituted as defendant no. 4(a) to 4(d) in T.S. No. 43 of 1991 impeach the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), IInd Additional Court Cuttack, in the said suit rejecting their petition to expunge the evidence of P.W.3 on record for being eschewed from consideration in deciding the suit.

2. It may be stated that one Kasinath was the original plaintiff. On his death, the present opposite parties no. 1 to 5 having came to be substituted, are pursuing the suit.

3. The suit is one for partition and the subject matter of the same are the property described in schedule ‘B’ and ‘C’ of the plaint. In so far as schedule ‘B’ property is concerned, there remains no such dispute with regard to its nature and thus there stands no contentious issue on the score that the schedule ‘B’ property is liable to be partitioned. The dispute centers round the properties described in scheduled ‘C’ of the plaint. When the plaintiffs claim it to be the joint family property liable for partition amongst the members of the family e