BHATTA NAIK Vs. KAMALAKANTA DWIBEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal appellant challenges the legality and correctness of the order dated 3.11.2000 passed under Order 39, Rule 1, C.P.C. by learned District Judge, Keonjhar in M.J.C. No. 19 of 2000.

(2.) THE factual position is almost admitted on record to the effect that the present petitioner/appellant instituted Title Suit No. 44 of 1995 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Keonjhar, with the claim of right, title, interest and confirmation of possession over the suit scheduled land, a part of which is covered by the impugned order of injunction. Defendant No. 1 in that suit, who is respondent No. 1 in this appeal, filed a counter claim claiming right, title, interest and confirmation of possession, alternatively recovery of possession over a substantial part of the suit scheduled land. At the stage of hearing, because of the default in appearance by the plaintiff to participate in the hearing, learned Civil Judge dismissed the suit for default of the plaintiff and adjudicated the counter claim ex parte and allowed the counter claim of the respondent No. 1. The order portion in that judgment which forms part of the decree, reads as hereunder :