ANNAPURNA TRIPATHY Vs. SRI PRAFULLA KU. PANIGRAHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bhadrak in C.S. No.102 of 2003 -I dated 16.5.2011 (Annexure -3) wherein the learned Court disallowed the prayer of the petitioner for stay of further proceedings in the aforesaid Civil Suit.

(2.) I may mention here that the present petitioner was the defendant in a suit i.e. C.S. No.102 of 2003 -I instituted by her brother, the present opposite party No.1 Prafulla Kumar Panigrahi for declaration that the name of the petitioner i.e. defendant recorded in the Major Settlement as well as Consolidation Record of Rights in respect of 'A' Schedule land to be illegal and void and also for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from advancing any claim whatsoever over the suit property and from entering into the suit property. The sole defendant, namely, the present petitioner entered appearance in the said suit and contested the same. During pendency of the said suit in the Court below, a petition was filed by the present petitioner (as the defendant) that in view of the pendency of Consolidation Appeals i.e. D.D. Appeal Nos.6, 7, 8 and 9 of 2006, further proceedings in C.S. No.102 of 2003 -I should be stayed. Serious objection was raised to such prayer of the defendant by the plaintiff on the ground that the appeals which have been filed have not yet been admitted even after lapse of four years and besides that in view of disposal of W.P.(C) No.8016 of 2006 the prayer of the Defendant to stay further proceedings of the Civil Suit should be rejected.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for both parties in the matter and perused the impugned order at Annexure -3. Perused the order of the Director of Consolidation, Orissa, Cuttack in Consolidation Revision No.3533 of 2003 which was filed by the plaintiff impleading the present petitioner as opposite party challenging the recording of the present petitioner along with him in the finally published Consolidation Record of Right. The said revision was disposed of by the Director, Consolidation and the matter was remanded back to the Consolidation Officer, Tihidi to hear the matter afresh with regard to the correction of records as it needs verification of records along with the documents. When the matter was remanded back to the Consolidation Officer, Tihidi the said Consolidation Officer, Tihidi disposed of the Remand Revision Case nos.3531, 3532 and 3536 of 2003 on 28.9.2005 directing the name of the present petitioner to be deleted from the record of right i.e. in respect of Hal Khata No.823, 684, 254 and 683. Challenging such order of the learned Consolidation Officer, Tihidi the present petitioner has filed appeals before the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bhadrak which have been registered as D.D. Appeal Nos.6, 7, 8 and 9 of 2006 on 20.2.2006 and those were directed to be put up before the Deputy Director for perusal and orders.