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

2025 Supreme(Ori) 829

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Debaraj Mohanty – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. D. Samal, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. J. Sahoo, A.S.C.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under constitutional articles to challenge an order. (Para 1)
2. pending civil suit impacts jurisdiction of revenue authorities. (Para 2)
3. contradictions in order create confusion and require legal intervention. (Para 4 , 5)
4. writ petition allowed to quash ambiguous order and remand for fresh decision. (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
5. final orders issued for the writ petition and directions for further proceedings. (Para 7 , 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the Petitioners praying for quashing the final order dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure-5) passed in R.P. Case No.853 of 2015 by the Additional Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement, Cuttack- 1, Headquarters at Collectorate, Jajpur (O.P. No.2) on the ground that, though, there is finding in the body of the impugned order (Annexure-5) in favour of the O.P. Nos.4 to 9, but, in its conclusion, the R.P. Case No.853 of 2015 was dropped, which is confusing both the Parties i.e., whether the R.P. Case No.853 of 2015 has been allowed on merit or the same has been dropped without any merit.

To which, the learned counsels for the O.P. No

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