ORISSA HIGH COURT
RAMESH CHANDRA NATH SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
SUDHANSHU SEKHAR NATH SHARMA – Respondent
CRP 33 / 2023
##PAGE1##
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
C.R.P. No.33 of 2023
An application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908
***
Ramesh Chandra Nath Sharma … Petitioner
-VERSUS-
Sudhanshu Sekhar Nath Sharma & Others …
Opposite Parties
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioner : Mr. S.C.Nath Sharma, Advocate
Mr.S.J.Biswal, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. P.K.Nanda, Advocate
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing: 02.12.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 23.12.2025
Page 1 of 9
##PAGE2##JUDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
1. This revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C,1908 has been
filed by Petitioner (Defendant No.1 in the suit vide C.S. No.1983
of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division),
L.R., Bhubaneswar) against the Opposite Party No.1 (Plaintiff in
the suit vide C.S. No.1983 of 2017 arraying the Defendant Nos.2
and 3 of the said suit as the proforma Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3
challenging an order of rejection to his petition dated 11.08.2023
(Annexure-5) under Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d) of the C.P.C.,1908
passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), L.R.,
Bhubaneswar.
2. The factual backgrounds of this revision, which prompted
the Petitioner (Defendant No.1 in the suit vide C.S. No.1983 of
2017) for filing of the same is that, the suit vide C.S. No.1983 of
2017 was filed by the O.P. No.1 in this revision being the Plaintiff
praying for partition of the suit properties.
3. In the said suit vide C.S. No.1983 of 2017, the Defendant
No.1 (Petitioner in this revision) filed a petition on dated
04.03.2021 (Annexure-2) under Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d) of the
Page 2 of 9
##PAGE3##C.P.C., 1908 Praying for rejection of the plaint of the Plaintiff
under the following two grounds i.e.:-
(I) the suit for partition filed by the Plaintiff is not
maintainable, as the suit properties are the self-acquired
properties of the Defendant No.1 (father of the Plaintiff)
in respect of which, the suit vide C.S. No.1983 of 2017 is
not maintainable.
(II) The suit of the Plaintiff has been undervalued.
To which, the Plaintiff (O.P. No.1 in this revision) objected as
per Annexure-3 stating that, the grounds raised in the Petition of
the Defendant No.1 (Petitioner in this revision) for rejection of the
plaint are not entertainable, because, on the basis of his
pleadings, the same are adjudiciable and the same are required
to be decided in the judgment of the suit. For which, the petition
under Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d) of the C.P.C., 1908 filed by the
Defendant No.1 (Petitioner in this revision) is liable to be rejected.
4. After hearing from both the sides, the learned Trial Court
rejected to the petition dated 04.03.2021 (Annexure-2) under
Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d) of the C.P.C., 1908 of the Defendant
No.1 as per the impugned Order dated 11.08.2023 (Annexure-5)
assigning the reasons that,
Page 3 of 9
##PAGE4##“the plaint of the Plaintiff (O.P. No.1 in this revision) vide C.S.
No.1983 of 2017 cannot be rejected at its threshold in its
preliminary stage”.
5. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the
Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.1.
6. Basing upon the Petition under Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d)
of the C.P.C, 1908 of the Defendant No.1 (Petitioner in this
revision) objection against the same filed by the Plaintiff (O.P.
No.1 in this revision), findings and observations made above in
the impugned order 11.08.2023 (Annexure-5) by the learned Trial
Court and the rival submissions of the learned counsels of both
the sides, the crux of this revision is that,
(i) whether, the suit of the Plaintiff (O.P. No.1 vide C.S.
No.1983 of 2017) for partition is liable to be rejected at
its threshold as per Order 7 Rule 11 (b) and (d) of the
C.P.C, 1908 on the ground that, the said suit for
partition is not maintainable.
(ii) whether the plaint in the suit vide C.S. No.1983 of
2017 can be rejected on the ground of undervaluation
raised by the Defendant No.1 (Petitioner in this revision).
7. So far as, the first ground f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.