The court emphasized the need to establish the existence of the unregistered Hata Patta or lease deed before seeking its impounding under Sections 33 & 35 of the Indian Stamp Act.

JUDGMENT

Biswanath Rath, J. - This is a Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 3.11.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Puri involving C.S. No.87/33 of 2010-2009, vide Annexure-7. The impugned order involved appears to be in rejection of a Petition, vide Annexure-6 seeking direction of the trial court impounding the unregistered Hata Patta or lease deed dated 11.5.1937 at the instance of the Plaintiff-Petitioners.

2. Background involving the case is the Plaintiffs brought C.S. No.33/2009 even somewhere it is mentioned as C.S. No.87/33 of 2010-2009 on the File of Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Puri seeking declaration of the right of occupancy or stitiban right of the Plaintiffs over the suit property, granting decree of permanent injunction against Defendant Nos.1 to 3 restraining them from interfering in the peaceful possession of the Plaintiffs over the suit property, from dispossessing them therefrom, breaking the house thereon or from causing any waste or damage thereto in any manner whatsoever and from impairing its value in any manner, further for award of cost against the Defendants and grant of such other reliefs as are deemed appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

3. Property involves in the Suit measuring an area of Ac.0.17 decimals is a part of a large patch of land over Sabik Plot No.1625, Sabik Khata No.129, Mouza-Samang, Dist.-Puri, measuring an area of Ac.01.36 decimals claimed to be originally belong to Ex-intermediary Defendant No.1 claiming to be lying fallow without any use. It is claimed, on the request of one Fakir Sahoo S/o.Chai Sahoo, the late grandfather of the Petitioners, the then Marfatdar of Shree of Defendant No.1, late Mahanta Sri Jagannath Ramanuja Das executed an unregistered Hata Patta/lease deed in favour of Fakir Sahoo on 11.5.1937 by inducting him as the Rayat of the said property to carry out horticultural operations on acceptance of Salami of Rs.200/- and fixed annual rent of Rs.2/-. Possession of the suit property was also delivered to the Plaintiffs' grandfather, since which time Fakir Sahoo, the grandfather was in possession and in enjoyment of the suit land by paying rent regularly. It is claimed that Fakir Sahoo, the grandfather of the Plaintiff-Petitioners died in 1950, consequent upon which his son, late Bareni Sahoo, the Plaintiffs' father inherited the rayatis and the Plaintiffs being the legal heirs of late Bareni Sahoo consequently remained in possession of the suit land. In bringing the suit, reason shown to be in the Plaint that after the death of their father, some employees of Defendant Nos.2 & 3 threatened to dispossess the Plaintiff-Petitioners from the suit land following the order dated 26.3.2004 passed in O.E.A (Suo Moto) Case No.267/2000, consequent upon which the suit land claimed to have been settled for fair and equitable rent with Defendant No.2. It is claimed, the Petitioners' father coming to know the development through the O.E.A. Proceeding preferred O.E.A. Appeal No.5 of 2008 on the File of Additional District Magistrate, Puri, which was claimed to be pending as on the date of filing of the suit. It is claimed, even in spite of pendency of the O.E.A. Appeal, O.Ps.2 & 3 continued to threaten to interfere in the peaceful possession of the Plaintiff-Petitioners resulting filing of the Civil Suit involved herein. Pursuant to notice in the Suit, O.P.1 though did not appear and the Suit remained ex parte against O.P.1, O.Ps.2 & 3, the Defendant Nos.2 & 3 appeared and filed their written statement clearly denying the existence of Hata Patta in favour of the late grandfather of the Plaintiffs. Further challenge is also made to the validity of unregistered Hata Patta/lease deed dated 11.5.1937, if any, for restrictions under the provision of Sections 33 & 35 of the Indian Stamp Act. It is while the matter stood thus claiming foundation in the Civil Suit through such document, the Plaintiffs filed a Petition in the tri