RAMA CH. MOHAPATRA Vs. NARAYAN CH. PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ application has been filed by the Petitioner -Rama Ch. Mohapatra seeking to challenge the Order Dated 29.8.1992 (Annexure -1) passed by the Learned Munsif, Kendrapara in T.S. No. 127 of 1983 allowing the petition filed by the Defendants under Order 14, Rule -2 Code of Civil Procedure & directing the Plaintiff to amend the plaint & to insert the prayer of declaration of title & also to pay the necessary Court fee thereon. The Petitioner further seeks to challenge the order passed by the Learned District Judge, Cuttack rejecting the Petitioners challenge to the aforesaid order in Civil Revision No. 185 of 1992 vide Order Dated 20.4.1993 (Annexure -2).

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner vehemently urged that the Plaintiff -Petitioner had filed the suit alleging therein that his father was a settled raiyat of the village where the suit land is situated, i.e. Mouza -Nagpur & that he had been inducted by the ex -proprietor as a tenant with respect to the suit land, & had been put into possession of the tenanted land & that the ex -proprietor had been accepting the rent from him as proprietor till vesting of the estate. Further the case of the Plaintiff -Petitioner is that his tenancy right has already been determined by the Tahasildar, Kendrapara by fixing rent, cess & salami which he had also paid & thereafter, the State has accepted him as recognized tenant over the suit scheduled property. The Plaintiff had further stated that since Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 are trying to dispossess the Plaintiff in collusion with the State functionaries, the Plaintiff had issued notice Under Section 80 Code of Civil Procedure & thereafter, filed the present suit with a prayer seeking permanent injunction against the Defendants. .

(3.) SRI Routray, Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff -Petitioner asserted that the Plaintiff was the master of his own suit & the prayer made by the Plaintiff in the plaint seeking "permanent injunction" was permissible in law Under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Apart from the above, Learned Counsel further submitted that the direction of the Trial Court directing Plaintiff to amend the suit & seek for declaration of the title was beyond the scope of Order 14 Rule 2 Code of Civil Procedure