Allowed

Bikala Charan Sasmal v. Nanda Sasmal

Orissa HC18 Jul 2022CMP/917/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa disposed of a CMP challenging an order that set aside a Lok Adalat settlement. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that such orders are challengeable only via writ petition, thus setting aside the impugned order and granting liberty to the opposite parties to file the writ.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 10th March, 2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge allowing the application under Section 151 CPC was set aside.

Bikala Charan Sasmal Vs Nanda Sasmal — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CMP No.917 OF 2016 Bikala Charan Sasmal Petitioner

¶3

Mr. Arun Kumar Mishra, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Purusottam Rana, Advocate

¶6

Nanda Sasmal and others

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

20.07.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

This CMP has been filed assailing the order dated 10^th

¶15

March, 2016 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1^st Court, Cuttack in CMAPL No.185 of 2012 (arising out of C.S. No.101 of 2010), whereby an application under Section 151 C.P.C. was allowed by setting aside the order passed by Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat, Cuttack.

¶16

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that C.S. No.101 of 2010 was filed by the present Petitioner for partition. On a settlement arrived between the parties, the matter was disposed of by the Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat, Cuttack vide order dated 28^th November, 2010. The DefendantsOpposite Party Nos.2, 3 and 5 alleging fraud played and impersonation made by the Petitioner, filed an application under Section 151 C.P.C. recall the said order. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1^st Court, Cuttack on consideration of the

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

matter allowed the said application, which is under challenge in this CMP.

¶20

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the case law in Bhargavi Constructions and another -vKothakapu Muthyam Reddy and others , reported in AIR 2017 SC 4428 and submits that an order passed by Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat can only be challenged in a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution before the High Court. Thus, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside.

¶21

Mr. Rana, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties submits that there is no dispute to the legal position as stated by the Petitioner. But the Defendants-Opposite Party Nos.2, 3 and 5 should not go remediless in challenging the order passed in the Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat, Cuttack, which was an outcome of fraud and impersonation. Hence, he submits that liberty may be granted to the Opposite Parties to file a properly constituted writ petition assailing the order passed by the Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat, Cuttack.

¶22

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the ratio decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhargavi Constructions (supra), this Court sets aside the order dated 10^th March, 2016 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1^st Court, Cuttack in CMAPL No.185 of 2012 (arising out of C.S. No.101 of 2010).

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

It is, however, observed that the Defendants-Opposite Party Nos.2, 3 and 5, if so advised, may work out their remedy in accordance with law.

¶27

The CMP is accordingly disposed of.

¶28

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper

¶29

application.

¶30

(K.R. Mohapatra)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Bikala Charan Sasmal v. Nanda Sasmal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bikala Charan Sasmal v. Nanda Sasmal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dibya Prasanna Tripathy Vs Pritam Utkalika Dhupal

Mohan Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Subaneswar Khandai Vs Mayadhar Khandai

Trilochan Barik Vs R.T.O., Cuttack

Jagan Mallik @ Jagan Kumar Mallik Vs Parikshita Mallick @ Paresh Ray

Prafulla Chandra Pradhan Vs Niranjan Pradhan