MALABIKA MOHAPATRA Vs. CHARULATA MOHANTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Ray, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners/ plaintiffs. He submits, his clients filed the suit for cancellation of sale deed got executed by defendant no.1, in favour of defendant nos.8 to 12. The trial Court did not find favour with applying defendants in their contention that the plaint should be rejected as not disclosing cause of action. Ultimately, a revision petition under sec. 115 in Code of Civil Procedure was filed by applying defendants and impugned order made rejecting the plaint as not disclosing cause of action. This could not have been done in revision.

(2.) Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of opposite party no.1/defendant no.1 and submits, as per sub-sec. (2) in sec. 2, order rejecting plaint is a decree and therefore petitioners cannot maintain present petition invoking article 227 in the Constitution of India. On query from Court whether there is Orissa amendment to sec. 115, he seeks adjournment.

(3.) Mr. Ray seeks direction for issuance of notice on opposite party nos. 2 to 12 on apprehension that the property will be dealt with in the meantime. Let there be issuance of notice along with copy of this order upon said opposite parties. Petitioners will put in requisites.