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

2026 Supreme(Ori) 468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C. BEHERA, J.
Sashibhusan Purohit and another – Petitioners
Versus
Prakash Chandra Purohit - Opposite Party
C.M.P. No.316 of 2024
Decided On : 23-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Ms. P. Naidu, Advocate assisted

In partition suits, all co-owners retain interest in joint properties until a formal partition is established, necessitating expedient resolution of such suits.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order-39, Rule-4 and Order-43, Rule-1(r) - Petition to quash orders related to a partition suit - Petitioners sought permission to sell joint properties; the Civil Judge dismissed the request citing no compelling circumstances - The District Judge also upheld the dismissal, leading to a CMP being filed by the petitioners. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Partition Suits - Co-ownership interests and joint properties - Until partition is finalized, joint owners retain interest in all properties. The court stressed the necessity for expeditious disposal of partition suits. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners filed a petition in a partition suit seeking permission to sell joint properties. Their petition was rejected at multiple judicial levels due to lack of compelling reasons to modify prior orders.

Findings of Court:
The court outlined the rights of co-owners in joint property and instructed for speedy resolution of the partition suit.

Issues: The core issues revolved around the necessity for compelling circumstances to alter previous judicial decisions and the rights of co-owners in jointly held properties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of timely resolution in partition suits and clarified that all co-owners maintain an interest in all jointly owned properties until partition is achieved.

Result: CMP disposed of with directions for expedited proceedings.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek to quash previous orders (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing conducted without opposite party's presence (Para 3)
3. property interests remain undivided until partition (Para 5)
4. cmp is disposed of with directions (Para 6 , 7)

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 which, the petitioners challenged by filing FAO No.6 of 2023 under Order-43, Rule-1(r) of the C.P.C., 1908 before the learned District Judge, Balangir. But, the learned District Judge, Balangir dismissed to that FAO No.6 of 2023 of the petitioners as per the judgment dated 07.02.2024.

To which, the petitioners challenged by filing this CMP under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950.

3. Heard only from the learned counsel for the petitioners, as none appeared from the side of the opposite party to participate in the hearing of the CMP. passed in I.A. No.42 of 2021 in a suit for partition vide C.S. No.11 of 2021.

5. When this CMP has arisen out of a suit for partition vide C.S. No.111 of 2021 and when as per law, till the joint and undivided suit properties are partitioned through metes and bounds partition, each and every co-owner including the petitioners have their interest in every inch/parcel of the suit properties and when the petitioners and opposite party are the joint owners of the suit properties, then at this juncture, instead of allowing this CMP in full, the ends of justice shall bestly be served, if necessary directions shall be given to the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Balangir for disposing of the suit for partition vide C.S. No.111 of 2021 as expeditiously as possible within a period of four months from the date of passing of this judgment.

6. As such, with the aforesaid observations, this CMP filed by the petitioners is disposed of finally.

7. Registry is directed to communicate the copy of this judgment to the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Balangir immediately.

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 Back to top