Ramakrushna Nayak VS Manoj Kumar Behera

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

R. K. PATTANAIK
Ramakrushna Nayak – Appellant
Versus
Manoj Kumar Behera – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.K. Mishra, Senior Advocate along with Mr. J. Pradhan, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties:Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Instant petition is filed by the petitioner assailing the impugned decision by order dated 20th February, 2024 as at Annexure-8 of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nimapara in I.A. No.101 of 2023 arising out of the suit in C.S. No.162 of 2023 for having appointed a Pleader Commissioner in terms of Order 39 Rule 7 CPC at the behest of the opposite parties on the grounds inter alia that such a decision is not sustainable in law, hence, therefore, the same is liable to be interfered with and set aside.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit instituted seeking a relief permanent injunction against the opposite parties in respect of the suit schedule property and not to interfere in his possession over the same along with the proforma defendants. The suit land is morefully described in the plaint as at Annexure-1. By pleading that the opposite parties do not have any right title, interest and possession over the suit schedule property, it has been claimed by the petitioner in Annexxure-1 that he is being threatened by them, who are contemplating to raise illegal construction there over on the strength of a void gift deed and mutation RoR issued in favour of the Secr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document