Bhikari v. Jagyasini
Case brief
What is this about?
Defendants appealed against a Subordinate Judge reversing a trial court order dismissing a suit for declaration regarding adoption maintainability. The High Court held the suit is maintainable, dismissing the appeal to permit hearing within three months.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal was dismissed. The learned trial court is directed to conclude the hearing of the suit within three months.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK
S.A. No.214 of 1987
From the judgment and decree dated 29.7.1987 and 17.8.1987 respectively passed by Sri G.D. Sarangi, learned Subordinate Judge, Bargarh in T.A. No.3 of 1984 reversing the judgment and decree dated 30.9.1983 and 7.10.1983 respectively passed by Sri A.K. Patnaik, learned Munsif, Bargarh in T.S. No.46 of 1981.
Bhikari Pradhan and others ………..…….… Appellants ---versus— Jagyasini Pradhan …………..…..… Respondent
For Appellants : Mr. A.K. Mahakud, Advocate For Respondent : None
J U D G M E N T
P R E S E N T:
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE A.K. RATH
Date of Hearing :02.04.2018 │ Date of Judgment:02.04.2018
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a suit for declaration that an adopted son is not the adopted son of alleged parents is maintainable under Sec.34 of the Specific Relief Act.
Whether Sec.42 of the Specific Relief Act restricts the jurisdiction of Courts to grant declaratory decrees outside the purview of the section.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bhikari Pradhan and others
- respondent
Jagyasini Pradhan
Coram
A.K. Rath
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court