Disposed¶30

Mirza Zabir Ali Baig v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC3 Oct 2024CMP/753/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Adverse inference; expunction/deletion of observation; order dated 03.10.2024 in CMP No.753 of 2024; I.A. No.1488 of 2024; Tahasildar, Salipur; suo motu Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987; government khata; Sarbasadharana status; O.E.A. Collector; records destroyed in Super Cyclone of 1999; objection to I.A. No.176 of 2023; C.S. No.179 of 2023; observation is only a statement of law; trial Court to decide on pleadings and materials on record. Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Coram: K.R. Mohapatra, J.; Decided: 08.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to expunge/delete the observation was not acceded to; the I.A. was disposed of with the observation that the earlier observation is only a statement of law and the learned trial Court is expected to adjudicate C.S. No.179 of 2023 on the basis of the pleadings and materials available on record.

Mirza Zabir Ali Baig Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the observation 'adverse inference will be drawn' in the order dated 3rd October, 2024, by which CMP No.753 of 2024 was disposed of, should be modified/deleted/expunged. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

The observation in the order dated 3rd October, 2024 that adverse inference would be drawn if the record of Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 was not produced before the learned trial Court for verification is only a statement of law; the apprehension of the Tahasildar, Salipur to that extent is unfounded.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial Court is expected to adjudicate the matter (C.S. No.179 of 2023) on the basis of the pleadings as well as the materials available on record.

¶29

Key takeaways

The Tahasildar, Salipur, having relied upon the order passed in Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 and having stated in the objection that it was made following due procedure of law, must have gone through the material and, being satisfied, filed the objection.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa (K.R. Mohapatra, J.), order dated 08.08.2025 in I.A. No.1488 of 2024 arising out of CMP No.753 of 2024: The I.A. sought modification/deletion of the observation 'adverse inference will be drawn' contained at Paragraph-7 of the order dated 3rd October, 2024, by which CMP No.753 of 2024 was disposed of. The Tahasildar, Salipur (through learned Standing Counsel) submitted that the entire records in his record room, including the records of suo motu Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 (on which he had relied to record the suit property in government khata under 'Sarbasadharana' status), were destroyed in the Super Cyclone of 1999, and that the observation may influence the trial Court in C.S. No.179 of 2023. The petitioner's counsel objected, contending the application was an afterthought since no such plea was taken in the objection to I.A. No.176 of 2023. Held: the observation is only a statement of law; the apprehension of the Tahasildar, Salipur is unfounded; the learned trial Court is expected to adjudicate C.S. No.179 of 2023 on the basis of the pleadings and materials available on record. I.A. disposed of accordingly.

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Aug-2025 17:46:26

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMP No. 753 OF 2024

¶4

Mirza Zabir Ali Baig

¶5

…. Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Ajit Kumar Tripathy, Advocate -versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

Mr. Gyanalok Mohanty, Standing Counsel

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

¶12

Order No.

¶13

ORDER 08.08.2025

¶14

I.A. No.1488 of 2024

¶15

¶16

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶17

This I.A. has been filed to modify/delete an observation to the extent “ adverse inference will be drawn ” from the order dated 3^rd October, 2024, by which CMP No.753 of 2024 was disposed of.

¶18

Mr. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel submits that at Paragraph-7 of the order dated 3^rd October, 2024, this Court observed as under:

¶19

“……….Since the Tahasildar, Salipur verily relies upon the order passed in suo motu Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 to record the suit property in government khata, adverse inference will be drawn against such action, if such record is not produced in the Court for verification.”

¶20

3.1. It is his submission that in the Super Cyclone of 1999, entire records in the record room of Tahasildar, Salipur were destroyed along with records of Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987.

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Aug-2025 17:46:26

¶24

Thus, it is beyond the control of the Tahasildar, Salipur to produce such record. As such, the observation to the aforesaid extent may influence learned trial Court while adjudicating C.S. No.179 of 2023. He, therefore, prays for expunging/deleting the observation to the aforesaid extent. 4. Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner (in CMP) vehemently objects to the same. It is his submission that this Court has only stated the position of law for not producing the document by a party, on which he relies upon. In the objection to the I.A. No.176 of 2023, order passed in which was the subject matter of dispute in CMP No.753 of 2024, no such plea was taken by the Tahasildar, Salipur. Thus, the application is an afterthought and without any basis. Hence, the I.A. should be dismissed with cost.

¶25

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the Tahasildar, Salipur relied upon the order passed in Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 to record the suit property in government khata under ‘ Sarbasadharana’ status. It is also stated in the objection that following due procedure of law, the O.E.A. Collector directed to record the land in Government khata in Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987. Thus, it is obvious that the Tahasildar, Salipur must have gone through the material and being satisfied, filed the objection stating that the order passed in Vesting Case No.1069 of 1987 was made following due procedure of law.

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Aug-2025 17:46:26

¶29

In view of the above, this Court in order dated 3^rd October, 2024 observed that if such record is not produced before learned trial Court for verification, adverse inference will be drawn against such action. It is only a statement of law. Thus, the apprehension of Tahasildar, Salipur to that extent is unfounded. Learned trial Court is expected to adjudicate the matter on the basis of pleadings as well as materials available on record.

¶30