SRI DEBASISH SATAPATHY Vs. SRI RADHA MADHABA PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Article 227 of the constitution of India, challenge is made to the order dated 15.09.2016 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore in C.S. No.811 of 2013, whereby and whereunder the learned trial court rejected the written statement-cum-counter claim of defendant no.3.

(2.) Opposite party no.1 as plaintiff instituted a suit for partition and other consequential briefs impleading the petitioner as well as opposite party nos. 2 and 3 as defendants. The petitioner is defendant no.3 in the suit. Pursuant to issuance of summons, defendant no.3 entered appearance and filed a written statement-cum-counter claim denying the assertions made in the plaint. An objection was raised by the office. Thereafter the matter was placed before the Presiding Officer for acceptance of counter claim. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the defendant no.3 that the entire properties of the plaintiffs and defendants were not brought into hotch-potch in the suit for which he has filed the counter claim by bringing all the joint family properties. On the other hand, a contention was raised by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that the plaintiff has purchased the land and as such he is not required to bring all the properties. Learned trial court came to hold that the plaintiff and defendant no.3 are the purchasers out of the suit land. Defendant no.3 filed a counter claim for partition of the suit along with other land which has been recorded in the name of defendant nos.1 and 2. Held so, learned trial court rejected the same.

(3.) Heard Mr. V. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.P. Mohanty, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1.