WP(C)/1997/2012
2021 Latest Caselaw 765 Ori

                               W.P.(C) No. 1997 of 2012




07.   22.01.2021         Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is
                   taken up through Video Conferencing.
                   2.    Heard Mr.Saktidhar Das, learned Senior Advocate
                   being assisted by Mr.Haripada Mohanty, learned counsel
                   for the petitioners and Mr.Swayambhu Mishra, learned
                   Additional Standing Counsel for State opposite parties.
                   3.    This writ petition has been filed for a direction to
                   restrain the opposite parties from disturbing the
                   peaceful possession of the petitioners over the land in
                   question in view of the decree of permanent injunction
                   passed in Title Suit No.8 of 1997 (Annexure-2) passed
                   by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kodala.
                   4.    In course of hearing, Mr.Das, learned Senior
                   Advocate submits that the petitioners have a remedy
                   under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC to execute the decree of
                   perpetual injunction and in view of Article 136 of the
                   Limitation Act, 1963 there will be no limitation in filing
                   the petition for enforcement of perpetual injunction. He,
                   therefore, prays for a fortnight's time to file a petition for
                   execution of the decree passed in TS No.8 of 1997,
                   which has never been varied or set aside by any
                   competent court of law. The decree passed in TS No.8 of
                   1997 is still in force
                   4.1    In   that   view   of   the   matter,   he   prays   for
                   withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a
                   petition for execution/enforcement of the decree of
                   perpetual injunction passed in TS No.8 of 1997. He
                   further prays for protection of his possession for fifteen
                   days to enable him to file execution case.
                                 2


     5.     Mr.Mishra, learned ASC though does not dispute
     the legal position, as submitted by Mr.Das, learned
     Senior Advocate. He however, submits that in the event
     a petition for execution of perpetual injunction is filed
     within a specified period, the same shall be dealt with in
     accordance with law.
     6.     Taking into consideration the submissions as well
     as prayer made by learned counsel for the parties, this
     Court disposes of the writ petition as withdrawn with an
     observation that in the event petitioners file petition for
     enforcement of judgment and decree passed by learned
     Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kodala in TS No.8 of 1997
     under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC within a period of fifteen
     days, the same shall be considered in accordance with
     law.
     6.1    Status quo in respect of possession over the land
     involved in TS No.8 of 1997 shall be maintained by the
     parties for a period of four weeks to enable the
     petitioner to move an application under Order XXI Rule
     32 CPC. It is made clear that this Court has not
     expressed any opinion on the merit of the case of the
     petitioner.
     6.2    Authenticated copy of this order downloaded from
     the website of this Court shall be treated at par with
     certified copy in the manner prescribed in this Court's
     Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.


                                    ................................
                                    K.R. MOHAPATRA,J.

ss