Disposed

Rabindra Kumar Mallick v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/27351/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted liberty to the petitioners in this writ petition to file an application before the Tahasildar seeking recall of an order dropping their case for default in producing documents. The Court found prima facie proof of the petitioners' claim to title and directed them to submit necessary documents within fifteen days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file an application before the Tahasildar seeking recall of the impugned order along with documents proving the flow of title within fifteen days.

Rabindra Kumar Mallick Vs State of Odisha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C). No.27351 of 2026

¶3

ODHC010649192026

¶4

Rabindra Kumar Mallick & Anr

¶5

…. Petitioners

¶6

Represented by

¶7

Mr. L.Samantaray, Sr. Advocate With Mr. M.Das, Advocate -Versus -

¶8

State of Odisha & Ors …. Opposite Party Represented by Mr. A.R.Dash, A.G.A.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶10

Order No. 01.

¶11

ORDER_ 10.09.2026

¶12

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

The petitioners challenge the order dated 23.10.2025 passed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar in OEA(S)Bebandobasta Case No. 309 of 2016. The petitioners claim to have acquired title over the property in question by way of purchase from the recorded owners. However, at the time of hearing, despite being granted time by the Court below, the petitioners could not produce the Sabik ROR for some reason. The case was therefore, dropped for such default on the part of the petitioners. The petitioners, while challenging the said order before this Court have filed a copy of the Sabik ROR as well as the registered sale deed dated 07.04.1964. It is submitted by Mr. L.Samantaray, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that if the petitioners are granted an opportunity, they can produce these documents before the Tahasildar to establish the flow

¶14

1 | P a g e

¶15

of title in their favour.

¶16

Learned State counsel submits that despite being granted opportunity, they failed to produce the relevant documents and therefore, no further opportunity should be granted.

¶17

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the documents filed in the case, this Court is of the view that there being prima facie proof that the petitioners have some semblance of right over the suit property, it would be proper to afford them an opportunity to prove their case by filing the necessary documents before the Tahasildar.

¶18

In such view of the matter, the writ application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to file an application before the Tahasildar seeking recall of the impugned order along with the documents proving the flow of title in their favour. If such application is filed within fifteen days, the Tahasildar shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶19

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶20

Deepak

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEEPAK PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,Cuttack Date: 11-Sep-2026 11:03:47

¶23

2 | P a g e

Rabindra Kumar Mallick v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabindra Kumar Mallick v. State of Odisha

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