Dismissed

Ganesh Prasad Nayak v. Addl. Commnr., S and C, Balasore

Orissa HC23 Mar 2021WP(C)/5848/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging a settlement authority order rejecting a claim to land due to the seller's death. The court held that the title dispute should be adjudicated by the Civil Court where a pending suit exists.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of; the matter to be adjudicated by the Civil Court dealing with the pending title suit.

Ganesh Prasad Nayak Vs Addl. Commnr., S and C, Balasore — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 5848 of 2021

¶2

23.03.2021 Heard Mr.Sukanta Kumar Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.N.Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite parties.

¶3

The petitioner in this writ petition assails the order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Settlement and Consolidation, Balasore in SRP Case No.268 of 2016, filed under Section 15(b) of the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 (for short, ‘the Act’).

¶4

The petitioner claimed their title over the suit land mainly relying upon a Registered Sale Deed No.6257 dated 13.12.1932 executed by one Bhagaban Chandra Mohapatra in favour of his daughter-in-law, Padmabati Dei and ultimately, the petitioner purchased the suit land from the rightful owner.

¶5

The Additional Commissioner rejected the petition under Section 15(b) of the Act on two counts. Firstly, on the ground that as per the entry in the Death Register maintained in the office of the District Magistrate and Collector, Balasore, said Bhagaban Chandra Mohapatra died on 04.11.1931, which is apparent from the entry made on 10.11.1931. Secondly, the inter

¶6

¶7

se dispute of title between the parties before the Additional Commissioner cannot be decided by the Settlement Authorities.

¶8

Mr.Nayak, leanred counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed Title Suit No.32 of 1984-I for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the suit property, which is pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak. The opposite parties herein are also defendants in the said suit.

¶9

Thus, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter can be effectively adjudicated by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak before whom Title Suit No.32 of 1984-I is stated to be pending.

¶10

Needless to say that the Court before whom the said Suit is pending shall do well to dispose of the same in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made by the Additional Commissioner in the impugned order.

¶11

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶12

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.

¶13

……..……………………

¶14

K.R. MOHAPATRA,J.

¶15

Ganesh Prasad Nayak v. Addl. Commnr., S and C, Balasore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Prasad Nayak v. Addl. Commnr., S and C, Balasore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghunath Panda Vs Collector,Bhadrak

Banabihari Mohanty Vs Joint Commissioner, Settlement and Consolidation

Rama Chandra Panda Vs Mohan Charan Panda

Rama Chandra Panda Vs Bipin Behari Rout

Basanta Kumar Bairiganjan Vs State of Odisha

Ganesh Prasad Nayak Vs Addl. Commnr., S and C, Balasore