Disposed

Bidyutlata Pradhan v. Sri Sri Maa Bagala Thakurani, Cuttack

Orissa HC25 Jan 2024CMP/24/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision matter, the petitioner sought directions to the trial court for obtaining a valuation report and early disposal of a suit. The court observed that the petitioner failed to file a specific application before the trial court for relief despite delays.

What did the court decide?

None granted. Court disposed of CMP with observation that if application is filed before trial Court, it should be considered in accordance with law.

Bidyutlata Pradhan Vs Sri Sri Maa Bagala Thakurani, Cuttack — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP NO. 24 OF 2024

¶2

Bidyutlata Pradhan

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Kishore Kumar Jena, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Sri Sri Maa Bagala Thakurani, Cuttack and others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

25.01.2024

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

2 . The Petitioner in this CMP prays for a direction to learned trial Court to take appropriate steps in obtaining the valuation report of the property in question and for early disposal of O.S. No.2 of 2016 pending before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1^st Court, Cuttack.

¶15

Mr. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Opposite Party No.1 in O.S. No.2 of 2016 is the Petitioner in this case. The Petitioner had earlier filed C.S. No.139 of 2011 for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the suit land. The suit was decreed in her favour vide judgment dated 16^th December, 2019 passed by 1^st Additional Civil Judge, Cuttack with the following order:

¶16

“ The suit be and the same is partly decreed against the deft. No. 1 & 2 on contest and ex parte against deft. No 3(a) to 3(c), deft. No 8 & 9 and dismissed against the deft. No 4 to 7. The right, title and interest of the plaintiff in respect of the suit property vide khata no 164, plot no 4 area Ac 0.080

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

dec with two asbestos rooms four thatched houses and latrin, municipality holding no. 447 under Ward no. 18 of mouza Jhanjirimangala, Cuttack town is hereby declared on the ground that the plaintiff succeeded the suit property as the adopted daughter of late Jayakrushna Pradhan and the deft. no 1 & 2 have got no right, title and interest over the suit property in any manner. In the facts and circumstances, the parties are to bear their own cost.”

¶20

Subsequently, the Opposite Party No.1 on the basis of an unregistered Will (Annexure-3) filed Test Case No.28 of 2009 before learned District Judge, Cuttack in respect of the suit property. The suit being contentious one was transferred to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1^st Court, Cuttack and is registered as O.S. No.2 of 2016. It is his submission that since 9^th May, 2022, the suit (Test Case) is being adjourned awaiting valuation report of the property in question from the District Collector.

¶21

3.1 Mr. Jena, learned counsel for the further submits that the Opposite Party No.1 is a helpless lady and due to lingering of the proceeding, she is not in a position to deal with her property independently. As such, finding no other alternative, the Petitioner has filed this CMP for the aforesaid relief.

¶22

Taking into consideration the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the record, it appears that the Opposite Party No.1 has not yet moved learned trial Court for appropriate relief in the said case. If there is delay in obtaining the valuation report of the property in question, appropriate application should have been filed in that regard.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

In view of the above, this Court disposes of the CMP with an observation that if appropriate application is filed before learned trial Court, the same should be considered in accordance with law.

¶26

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶27

bks

¶28

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: BIJAY KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Odisha, Cutta ck Date: 25-Jan-2024 20:22:24

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Bidyutlata Pradhan v. Sri Sri Maa Bagala Thakurani, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bidyutlata Pradhan v. Sri Sri Maa Bagala Thakurani, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahodadhi Builders Pvt. Ltd., Bbsr Vs Bijayalaxmi Sahoo

Rajiv Nayan Choudhury Vs Sarat Chandra Das

Swapnamayee Swain Vs State of Odisha

Madhusudan Majhi Vs Pahali Majhi

Babuli Rao Vs State of Odisha

Rajat Beura Vs State of Odisha