Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Lohit Padhan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fraudulent orders of consolidation must be addressed. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. claims of fraud require the authority to act. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. judicial bodies have inherent power to rectify decisions based on fraud. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. inherent power of courts to reverse orders affected by fraud. (Para 18) |
| 5. writ petitions allowed; orders set aside for further inquiry. (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
R.K. PATTANAIK, J.
1. All the writ petitions are disposed of by the following judgment since a common question is involved.
2. In the above noted cases, the challenge is with regard to the orders in revision proceedings vis-a-vis the subject matter in question relatable to the plots included in the preparation of new consolidation Khata and plots and deductions therefrom and decisions not to recall the orders obtained by fraudulent means and also to cancel the consolidation RoRs issued in favour of the opposite parties with such other consequential directions in that regard.
3. The facts of each case are not separately discussed and narrated for the sake of brevity but reference of one in W.P.(C) No. 7703 of 2017 would suffice the purpose. The petitioner therein like others
The court affirmed that authorities possess inherent jurisdiction to revoke fraudulent orders even in the absence of specific statutory provisions for review.
Quasi-judicial authorities cannot exercise review powers without explicit statutory authorization, and such actions taken after substantial delays are deemed illegal.
Personal action dies with the death of the person on the maxim action personalis moritur cum persona. But this operates only in a limited class of actions Ex delicto, such as action for damages for d....
Fraud vitiates every solemn act, and an order obtained by fraud can be recalled by the authority. The judiciary possesses inherent power to set aside an order obtained by fraud, and fraud unravels ev....
The contentious issue of title can only be decided by a competent civil court, and affidavits filed by attesting witnesses cannot be considered as evidence.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice, ruling that all parties must be included in property disputes to ensure fair adjudication.
A review petition is maintainable where there is fraud, suppression of material facts and developments involving the same land and that too when the property already became a property of the State.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
