Back
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Karunakar Panda – Appellant
Versus
Nityananda Panda – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks quashing of judgment due to procedural issues. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant 2 argues notice was unnecessary for counter claim. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. court reasons emphasize necessity of notice in partition cases. (Para 4 , 6 , 10) |
| 4. legal principle: counter-claims must be directed against the plaintiff. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. court affirms importance of notifying all parties in partition suits. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 6. final decision dismisses the petitioner’s cmp, affirming earlier rulings. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned Judgment dated 24.02.2021 passed in F.A.O No.99/2018 arising out of CMA No.40/2018 in connection with the counterclaim in the suit vide C.S. No.61 of 2014 by the learned District Judge, Bhadrak.
2. The factual backgrounds of this Civil Misc. Petition, which prompted the petitioner for filing the same is that, the Opp. Party No.1 in this CMP i.e.Nityananda Panda being the sole plaintiff filed a suit for partition vide C.S. No.61 of 2014 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Juni
A counterclaim in a partition suit must be against the plaintiff; failing to notify co-defendants constitutes a violation of natural justice, rendering any ex parte decree unsustainable.
Counter claims in partition suits must be directed against the plaintiff; co-defendants cannot initiate claims solely against each other without notice, as all parties have interchangeable roles.
A counter claim must relate to the plaintiff's claims; dissimilarity in cause of action renders it non-maintainable.
A defendant cannot file a counterclaim against a co-defendant under the CPC, as the provisions only allow counterclaims against the plaintiff.
Counter claims must be against plaintiffs and not co-defendants; prior partitions cannot be reopened based solely on alleged inequities.
Counter-claim by defendant – Though normal rule is that subsequent to filing of written statement, counter-claim cannot be filed after issues have been framed, under exceptional circumstances, counte....
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
