Surya Narayan Barik vs Kainti Thanapati (dead)

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Ori) 419

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Surya Narayan Barik – Appellant
Versus
Kainti Thanapati (dead) – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. P.V. Balakrishna, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Amit Kumar Nath, Advocate.

Table of Content
1. background of the appeal and initial case (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. facts regarding ownership and disputes (Para 4 , 5)
3. trial court's findings and evidence presentation (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. admissibility and implications of mutation (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
5. civil court's authority on title declaration (Para 12 , 13)
6. conclusion and dismissal of the appeal (Para 14 , 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This 2nd Appeal has been preferred against the confirming Judgment.

2. The respondents in this 2^nd Appeal were the plaintiffs before the learned Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.69/1990 and respondents before the learned First Appellate Court in the 1st Appeal vide T.A. No.109/36/6 of 1992-99.

The appellant in this 2nd appeal was the defendant before the learned Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.69/1990 and appellant before the learned First Appellate Court in the 1^st Appeal vide T.A. No.109/36/6 of 1992-99.

3. The suit of the plaintiffs (respondents in this 2^nd Appeal) against the defendant (appellant in this 2^nd Appeal) vide T.S. No.69/1990 was a suit for declaration of title, in alternative partition.

4. The case of the plaintiffs (respondents in this 2nd Appe