Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Kanhu Majhi – Appellant
Versus
Kartik Dehury – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details on the appellant and suit context (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. issues framed for determination in the suit (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. defendants' appeal against trial court ruling (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. substantial questions of law formulated (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. court reasoning on non-joinder of necessary parties (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. statutory requirement for property alienation (Para 16) |
| 7. dismissal of the appeal (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
This 2nd appeal has been preferred against the reversing judgment.
The respondents of this 2nd appeal were the defendants before the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.19 of 1994 and they were the appellants before the First Appellate Court in the First Appeal vide T.A. No.6 of 1996.
4. The suit properties are Hal Plot No.418/508 under Hal Khata No.12 in Mouza Bada-Dangua under Khunta Police Station in the District of Mayurbhanj described in Schedule ‘B’ of the plaint.
As per the Gazette Notification No.11680 dated 23.02.1965, the suit properties belonging to Gadanaikani Thakurani was treated as rayati and Hasilat land by the successor of Hadibandhu Dehury i.e. Sanatan Dehury. Sanatan Dehury was the only son of Hadibandhu Dehury. The defendants are th
The suit for declaration of title on a deity's property is invalid without the deity as a party, and sale deeds executed by the marfatdar without statutory permission are void.
Alienation of property belonging to a deity requires prior permission under the Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951; failure to include the deity as a party renders the suit non-maintainable.
A Marfatdar cannot alienate properties of deities without statutory permission; absence of necessary parties renders the suit non-maintainable.
The suit for title over property belonging to deities is non-maintainable if necessary parties are not joined, and alienation of such property requires statutory permission.
Properties owned by deities cannot be alienated by the Marfatdar without permission under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowment Act, rendering related transfers void and necessitating inclusion of dei....
A suit for declaration of title involving properties owned by deities is not maintainable without necessary parties, specifically the deities and any related institutions, according to the Orissa Hin....
The validity of a gift deed supersedes subsequent sales; individuals representing deities can sue to recover properties, affirming their legal standing to protect such interests.
The court established that a sale deed transferring property of a deity without proper authorization is invalid, making recovery suits unmaintainable if the deity is not a party.
Civil courts lack jurisdiction over disputes involving religious properties when necessary parties, specifically deities, are absent; such matters should be resolved under the relevant endowment act.
The court ruled that property devolved exclusively to the male heir after the mother's death before the Hindu Succession Act, invalidating claims of the female heir based on pre-Act rights.
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
