Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Sashibhusan Purohit – Appellant
Versus
Prakash Chandra Purohit – Respondent
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 07.02.2024 passed in FAO No.6 of 2023 by the learned District Judge, Balangir as well as the impugned order dated 24.11.2021 passed in I.A. No.42 of 2021 arising out of C.S. No.111 of 2021 by the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Balangir.
2. The factual backgrounds of this CMP, which prompted the petitioners for filing of the same is that, they (petitioners) filed a petition before the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Balangir in C.S. No.111 under Order-39, Rule-4 of the C.P.C., 1908 praying for I.A. Bo.42 of 2021 allowing them(petitioners) to sell the properties indicated in the schedule of their petition.
Learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Balangir rejected to the said petition under Order-39, Rule-4 of the C.P.C., 1908 of the petitioners on dated 18.05.2023 assigning the reasons that,
“There are no compelling circumstances to make any variation in the order dated 24.11.02021 passed in I.A. No.42 of 2021 arising out of the partition suit vide C.S. No.111 of 2021.”
To
In partition suits, all co-owners retain interest in joint properties until a formal partition is established, necessitating expedient resolution of such suits.
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....
In partition suits, amendments to the plaint should be allowed unless they cause injustice or prejudice to other parties, promoting efficiency in resolving disputes.
Amendments in civil suits for partition are to be allowed to ensure all issues are resolved, minimizing litigation unless they cause injustice or prejudice to the other party.
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....
Ambiguous status quo orders are unsustainable; courts must specify the status to be preserved to avoid legal uncertainties.
The principle that a prior sale takes precedence over a subsequent sale is affirmed, emphasizing the High Court's limited scope of interference under Article 227.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the amendment under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC should be allowed if substantially required for the ends of justice, and the limited scope of ....
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
