Orissa High Court
Charan Pahan And Others vs Sudarsan Barik And Others .... Opposite ... on 31 October, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRP No.30 of 2025
(In the matter of an application under Section 115 of the Code of
Civil Procedure)
Charan Pahan and others .... Petitioners
-versus-
Sudarsan Barik and others .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in this case:-
For Petitioners : Mr. L. Samantaray, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 31.10.2025 / date of judgment : 31.10.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This civil revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C., 1908 has been
filed by the petitioners(defendants in the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024
pending in the court of the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Khallikote,
Ganjam) against the Opposite Parties(plaintiffs in the suit vide C.S.
No.43 of 2024) challenging an order of rejection to their petition dated
20.09.2024 under Order-7, Rule-11 of the C.P.C., 1908 passed on dated
03.07.2025 in C.S. No.43 of 2024 by the learned Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Khallikote.
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners(defendants) and
learned counsel for the Opposite Parties(plaintiffs).
3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Opposite
Party Nos.1 to 7(Plaintiffs in the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024) contented
that, this revision (arising out of the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024 value at
Rs.55,000/-) filed by the petitioners(defendants) is not entertainable
before this Court, i.e., before the High Court.
4. According to him(learned counsel for the Opposite Parties), the
suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024, from which, this revision has arisen, is
valued at Rs.55,000/-(rupees fifty-five thousand) and in view of the
amendment to Section 115 of the C.P.C.(Orissa Amendment) made
through Orissa Gazette Ext. No.1785 dated 02.11.2010(w.e.f.
11.11.2010) Notification No.11730, Legis. Dated 2nd November, 2010,
when the value of the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024(from which this
revision has arisen) is less than rupees five lakhs, then, this revision
arising out of the impugned order passed in that suit is not entertainable
before the High Court on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, because,
according to the above Orissa Amendment to Section 115 of the C.P.C.,
1908, any civil revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C. like this revision
at hand arising out of any suit having its value not exceeding five lakhs
rupees is not maintainable before the High Court, because, the revision
under Section 115 of the C.P.C. before the High Court is maintainable
arising out of an original suit or other proceedings, only where, the value
of such suit or other proceedings exceeds five lakhs rupees.
The learned counsel for the petitioners(defendants) did not dispute
to the aforesaid Orissa Amendment to the Section 115 of the C.P.C.
w.e.f. 11.11.2010.
5. So, by taking the aforesaid submissions of the leaned counsels of
both the sides, the value of the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024(from which,
this revision has arisen) and the Orissa Amendment to Section 115 of the
C.P.C., 1908 w.e.f. 02.11.2010 into account, it is held that, this revision
filed by the petitioners(defendants) is not entertainable before this Court,
i.e., before the High Court, on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, as the
value of the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024 is Rs.55,000/-(rupees fifty-five
thousand), which is much less than rupees five lakhs and the revision
against the impugned order was entertainable before the jurisdictional
revisional court, i.e., before the learned Additional District Judge,
Khallikote instead of this Court.
6. When, it is held that, this revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C.
filed by the petitioners(defendants) is not entertainable before this Court
on the ground of valuation of the suit vide C.S. No.43 of 2024 for the
reasons assigned above and the same was entertainable before the learned
Additional District Judge, Khallikote, then at this juncture, the ends of
justice shall bestly be served, if this revision filed by the
petitioners(defendants) will be disposed of finally without entering into
the merits of this revision giving liberty to the petitioners(defendants) for
filing of the same before the jurisdictional revisional court, i.e., before
the court of learned Additional District Judge, Khallikote challenging the
impugned order.
7. On the basis of the aforesaid observations, this revision filed by the
petitioners(defendants) is disposed of finally giving liberty to the
petitioners(defendants) to file revision challenging the impugned order
before the jurisdictional revisional court, i.e., before the learned
Additional District Judge, Khallikote in the District of Ganjam annexing
the certified copy of this judgment within fifteen days of this judgment
and in case of filing of revision by the petitioners(defendants), the
learned Additional District Judge, Khallikote shall entertain the same
without questioning about the limitation in view of the provisions of
Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, as they (petitioners,
defendants) had approached the wrong forum, i.e., this Court bonafidely
and shall dispose of the same as per law on merit as expeditiously as
possible after giving opportunity of being heard to the parties.
8. As such, this civil revision filed by the petitioners(defendants) is
disposed of finally.
9. Certified copy of the impugned judgment be returned to the
petitioners(defendants) substituting the same for filing of revision before
the jurisdictional revisional court.
10. Parties are directed to keep the matter as it is in status quo until the
approach of the petitioners(defendants) to the jurisdictional revisional
court.
( A.C. Behera )
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 31st of October, 2025/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
