Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Dinabandhu Oram – Appellant
Versus
Dukhi Oram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of petition and execution order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court must provide a reasoned order. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. merit found in petition; order quashed. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. remand for fresh decision with opportunity to parties. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
A.C. Behera, J.
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing (setting aside) the impugned order dated 17.09.2024 passed in I.A. No.44 of 2024 arising out of Execution Suit No.26 of 2010 in connection with the Judgment and Decree passed in the suit vide C.S. No.40 of 2006 by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur.
2. The factual backgrounds of this CMP, which prompted the petitioners for filing of the same is that, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur passed an order on dated 30.08.2024 in Execution Suit No.26 of 2010 as follows:-
“The case record is posted today awaiting SR of writ of delivery of possession. SR of writ back with a report of the bailiff that, the execution of delivery of possession to the DHr is completed in presence of Executive Magistrate, police staff of Rengali PS and witnesses
A court must issue reasoned orders for all applications, even after a case is disposed of, rejecting motions based solely on functus officio is contrary to natural justice.
Ambiguous status quo orders are unsustainable; courts must specify the status to be preserved to avoid legal uncertainties.
Jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be invoked to correct subordinate court errors unless manifest injustices occur; findings on temporary injunction based on ownership records must be respected pe....
The Civil Procedure Code's function is to ensure fair hearings on merits, not to dismiss cases based on technical defaults.
In partition suits, all co-owners retain interest in joint properties until a formal partition is established, necessitating expedient resolution of such suits.
Amendments to the plaint should be allowed to minimize litigation and ensure all issues are addressed, provided they do not cause injustice or prejudice to the opposing party.
Objection to execution of decree – Running a separate miscellaneous proceeding under Section 47 of CPC is a misuse of process of court.
Amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC must be allowed if necessary for justice without causing injustice to other parties; delays should be properly compensated.
Amendments to plaint may be permitted under Order 6 Rule 17 to avoid multiplicity of litigation, even if they arise after the knowledge of certain facts, provided they do not prejudice the opposing p....
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
