Disposed
Niranjan Swain v. Sachindananda Samal
Orissa HCFAO/30/2018
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
This is an application against an order…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
F.A.O. NO. 30 OF 2018
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff. Perused the impugned order.
The appellant-plaintiff’s suit for declaration of his right, title and interest by virtue of adverse possession over the suit land has been dismissed by the trial court and said judgment and decree passed by the trial court in dismissing the suit are under challenge in the first appeal.
The respondent is the purchaser of the said land from the admitted original owner. It appears from the discussion made by the lower appellate court that though the claim of the appellant-plaintiff as to have acquired right, title and interest over the suit land by virtue of adverse possession is based upon his assertion of longstanding possession of the suit property, it has also been pleaded that during continuance of such possession, the appellant-plaintiff had agreed to purchase the suit land from the original owner and had paid some amount. But as subsequently, there arose dispute, the land was not sold to him.
On the face of such pleading, the lower appellate court having found it difficult to say that there is a prima facie case in favour of the appellant-plaintiff for
= 2 =
grant of temporary injunction, no such fault is found therein.
In that view of the matter, while being not inclined to entertain this appeal, it is however observed that the lower appellate court would do well to take effective steps for disposal of the R.F.A. No. 04 of 2017 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy.
The F.A.O. is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
…………………….. D. Dash, J.
Narayan
Appellant-Plaintiff
Respondent
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court