SUDARSAN PANDA Vs. LAXMIDHAR PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been directed against the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Anandapur, dismissing the objections raised by the petitioners in the final decree proceeding arising out of Title Suit No. 41 of 1952 in which a decree for partition on the basis of a petition of compromise had been passed allotting 7-annas share to the plaintiffs and 9-annas share to the defendants Nos. 1 to 5, the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 being the sons and the defendant No. 3 being the widow of late Dologobinda Panda and the defendants Nos. 4 and 5 being the sons of late Baidyanath Panda.

(2.) The legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 4 Gananath Panda made an application before the learned Subordinate Judge for a final decree. The plaintiffs and the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 5 resisted it on the grounds that (a) the application was barred by limitation, (b) the legal representatives of the defendant No. 4 had no locus standi to initiate the final decree proceeding, having not been substituted in time and (c) the final decree proceeding was not maintainable. Upon hearing the learned counsel for both the sides, the learned Subordinate Judge overruled the objections.

(3.) Mr. Mohanty, the learned counsel for the petitioners, has urged the same grounds raised before the learned Subordinate Judge and in support of the last objection viz., that the application for final decree proceeding without modification of the original decree is not maintainable, reliance has been placed on the principles laid down in AIR 1981 Mad 307, S. V. Muthu v. Veeramma, Mr. S. Misra for the opposite parties has submitted that none of the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners can prevail.