Sailamani Rout v. Dayanidhi Rout

CMP No.842 of 2016
08.11.2016

 Assailing the findings of the judgment dated 16.4.2016 of the learned Addl. Ci
vil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Balasore in C.S. No.902 of 2008, the instant petition has been filed und
er Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

 The opposite party no.1 as plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration and p
ermanent injunction claiming to be the adopted son of late Gangadhar Rout and late Mani Rout.
The petitioners were the defendant nos.5(a) to 5(d) in the said suit. The suit was dismissed.
Thereafter, the plaintiff filed R.F.A. No.95 of 2016 before the learned District Judge, Balaso
re, which is pending adjudication. At this juncture, a petition has been filed to quash the ju
dgment of the learned court below and to frame an issue with regard to the relationship of lat
e Mani Rout to Gangadhar Rout.

 Heard Mr. D. K. Sahoo-1, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. B. Baug, lea
rned counsel for the opposite party no.1 and Mr. C.R. Nanda, learned counsel for the opposite
party nos.2,3,6, 7(a) and 7(c).

 Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after pronouncement
 of the judgment, some alterations were made. Moreover, no specific issue with regard to the p
lea taken by the defendant no.5 has been made. In view of the same, the judgment of the court
below may be quashed.

 Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2,3,6,7(a) and & (c) sub
mits that since the plaintiff has filed R.F.A. No.95 of 2016 before the learned District Judge
, Balasore, it is open to the defendants to file cross objection.

 This Court finds ample force on the submission of Mr. Nanda, learned counsel f
or the opposite party nos.2,3,6,7(a) and & (c). R.F.A. No.95 of 2016 is pending before the lea
rned District Judge, Balasore. It is open to the defendants to file cross-objection. The defen
dants may also bring the notice of the learned appellate court with regard to the illegalities
 committed by the learned trial court.