Orissa High Court
Nunaram Majhi @ Tudu vs Sarat Chandra Jena And Another .... ... on 3 May, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CMP No.675 of 2025
Nunaram Majhi @ Tudu .... Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Mishra, Senior Advocate
-Versus-
Sarat Chandra Jena and another .... Opposite Parties
None
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
Order 03.05.2025
No.
01. 1. Heard Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for
the petitioner.
2. No notices are issued to the opposite parties as the matter is
disposed of at the stage of admission.
3. Instant petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the
correctness of the decision by order dated 21st December, 2024
passed in I.A. No.25 of 2023 by learned Civil Judge (Senior
Division), Rairangpur arising out of CS No.144 of 2023 as at
Annexure-4 followed by a judgment dated 27th March, 2025 in
FAO No.11 of 2024 as at Annexure-5 on the grounds stated.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner
would submit that such an order of mandatory injunction could not
have been passed by learned court below in absence of any such
relief from the side of the opposite parties. Furthermore, the
submission is that pending any such enquiry with the assistance of a
Salaried Amin having been directed, learned court below could not
have allowed any such interference of the local PS and therefore,
the impugned order dated 21st December, 2024 as at Annexure-4 is
liable to be interfered with. It is submitted that against the order
under challenge, FAO No.11 of 2024 was filed by the petitioner but
it was disposed of by learned Additional District Judge, Rairangpur,
Mayurbhanj by a judgment dated 27th March, 2025 i.e. Annexure-5
with a conclusion that the appeal is not maintainable. In any view
of the matter, according to Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate,
the opposite parties are not entitled to any such order as per
Annexure-4 with a direction to local police to hold an enquiry to
ensure ingress and egress using the suit schedule land, hence, the
same cannot be sustained in law.
5. In course of hearing, Mr. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior
Advocate for the petitioner cited a decision of this Court in
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Orissa, Bhubaneswar Vrs. Bhuban
Behari Sahoo and others 2001 (I) OLR 365 to contend that in rarest
of the rare cases, mandatory injunction is to be granted while
entertaining interlocutory applications seeking interim injunction.
6. In the case at hand, the learned court below has disposed of
the IA finally with such an order as per Annexure-4. A copy of the
plaint is at Annexure-1 and the same is gone through. In fact, the
opposite parties moved learned court below seeking injunction with
an application i.e. Annexure-2. A show cause was filed by the
petitioner to Annexure-2 and it was followed by Annexure-4 with a
conclusion that local enquiry is needed to restore the use of the suit
land as a passage by the opposite parties. It is further held therein
that a field enquiry is also necessary through a Salaried Amin.
Pending any such enquiry by the Amin, in view of such an order as
per Annexure-4, learned court below has directed the local PS to
take necessary steps to make the suit land free from any such
obstruction. In fact, from the impugned order i.e. Annexure-4, it is
made to reveal that the petitioner has no objection, if plaintiff No.2
is allowed the use the plot as a passage. Considering the nature of
claim of the opposite parties and objection by way of a show cause
as per Annexure-3 series from the side of the petitioner and
submission of Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioner with reference to the decision (supra), the Court is of the
view that instead of involvement of the local PS, it would serve the
purpose, if pending a field enquiry with the assistance of a Salaried
Amin, the parties are directed to maintain status quo in respect of
the suit land.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. In the result, the CMP stands disposed of. As a necessary
corollary, the impugned order i.e. Annexure-4 in IA No.25 of 2023
by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rairangpur corresponding
to CS No.144 of 2023 is hereby set aside to the extent as aforesaid
with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo in respect of
the suit land pending such field enquiry by a Salaried Amin. In the
circumstances, however, there is no order as to costs.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
TUDU
