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

SASHIKANTA MISHRA
Belamati Digal – Appellant
Versus
Pravabati Nayak – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Sashikanta Mishra, J.—The petitioners are defendant Nos. 3 and 5 in C.S. No. 29 of 2023 and Opposite Party Nos. 3 and 5 in CMA No. 3 of 2024 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), G. Udayagiri. Said suit was filed by Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 6 (plaintiffs) while the Opposite Party No. 7 to 22 are proforma defendants. In the present application, the petitioners seek to challenge order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the Court below in the aforementioned CMA whereby, the name of the suit schedule Mouza, as per the plaint schedule, was corrected by the Court below after passing of the judgment and decree exercising power under Section 152 of CPC.

2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the suit was filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit property, declaration that the unregistered ‘Will’ dated 07.09.1981 is valid and binding on all as per law, permanent injunction and relief. The suit was decreed vide judgment dated 28.03.2024 and the corresponding decree was drawn out by the Court on 08.04.2024. On 29.04.2024, the plaintiffs filed the aforementioned CMA for correction of the suit schedule Mouza in the

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top