MANORAMA CHHOTRAY Vs. PRAFULLA KUMAR CHHOTRAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed challenging the order dated 08.10.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in Civil Suit No.110/2011 rejecting the application of the plaintiff-petitioner under Order-18 Rule-1 CPC.

(2.) The fact of the case is that the petitioner being the plaintiff filed Civil Suit No.110/2011 in the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar for partition of the suit land by metes and bounds. The suit land is the joint undivided property of the family and the

(3.) The defendant-opposite parties on being noticed appeared through their counsel and filed their written statement denying the plaint allegations. They pleaded specifically in paragraph-8 of the written statement that after the death of Madan Mohan his properties were partitioned among his three sons and the same have been recorded separately vide Mistake No.147 and 563 and accordingly Settlement ROR vide Khata No.19 recorded in the name of Anathabandhu and Khata No.11 recorded in the name of Antrajyami and Prafulla. Though some properties were recorded jointly in the name of Anathabandhu, Antrajyami and Prafulla, yet the same were also partitioned and the parties are in separate possession.