GOPAL KRISHNA BADU MOHAPATRA Vs. GIRISH CHANDRA NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition arises out of an order passed by the District Judge, Puri, in C. R. No. 56 of 1999 confirming the order of the Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri, in O. S No. 90/211 of 1981/1977 -1 in rejecting three petitions filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) to call for an unregistered will from the Court of the Civil Judge (S. D.). Puri, which has been kept in a sealed cover in the office of the District Judge, Puri, in Probate Case No. 1/85, re -numbered as O. S. No. 116/88; (2) to direct the Sub -Registrar, Puri, to cause production of the registered sale deeds bearing No. 4697 dated 18 -11 -1955 and No. 4698 dated 18 -11 -1973 and (3) to direct the plaintiffs to produce the registered sale deed bearing No 2578 dated 29 -6 -1923 executed by Rani Hemanta Kumari Devi, which is in possession of the plaintiffs.

(2.) THE trial court after hearing parties rejected the first petition to call for the will on the ground that the same has no bearing on the subject -matter of the suit which is a suit for eviction of the first defendant from the room standing on the disputed property, The second petition was rejected with the finding that the parties have not relied upon the registered deeds anywhere in the pleadings and defendant Nos. 3 to 6 i.e., the present petitioners, are neither clear in their petition as to how the deeds are relevant to the present suit nor have they filed copies of the sale deeds to show that they are in any way necessary for the adjudication of the suit. The third petition filed by the petitioners to direct the plaintiffs, i.e., present O. p Nos. 1 and 2, to produce the registered sale deed dated 29 -6 -1923 on the ground defendant Nos. 3 to 6, i. e. the present petitioners, being aware of the aforesaid registered sale deed should have filed the certified copy of the same before the court to satisfy that the same is relevant and necessary for the suit. The trial court also observed that unless they satisfy the court by production of the certified copy, it cannot be held that the said registered sale deed is in any way relevant and material to the point at issue in the suit.

(3.) IN this writ petition, instead of going into the entire facts of the case, we have to see whether the impugned order rejecting the three petitions will come within the meaning of 'case decided' and whether there is any irregularity in the order including jurisdictional error which can be interfered in extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.