) Kartika Meher vs Nityananda Meher ..... Opposite Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 236 Ori

Orissa High Court

) Kartika Meher vs Nityananda Meher ..... Opposite Party on 12 January, 2026

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             CMP No.2133 of 2025
            1) Kartika Meher            .....       Petitioners
            2) Ahalya Meher                                  Represented by Adv. -
                                                             Bharat Bhusan Routray

                                          -versus-
            Nityananda Meher                         .....          Opposite Party
                                                              Represented by Adv. -

                                 CORAM:
                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                               MOHAPATRA

                                         ORDER

12.01.2026 Order No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. By filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the judgment debtor-defendant in Execution Case No.1 of 1999/2000, which arises out of Civil Suit No.1 of 1999/2000 disposed of by the Civil Judge, Bijepur, has approached this Court with a prayer not to proceed with the execution case as the schedule indicated in the Execution case includes "B" Scheduled property.

4. Learned counsel for the JDR-Petitioners at the outset contended that in the schedule of the plaint, the plaintiff has narrated only "A" Schedule Land. He further contended that so far the suit is concerned, only "A" Schedule Land is the subject matter of dispute. He further contended that in filing the execution

petition, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the present application, the decree holders have included "B" Schedule Land which was never the subject matter of dispute in the suit. On such ground, learned counsel for the decree holders-petitioners contended that the present execution petition which is pending for execution is not maintainable in the eye of law.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners, on a careful examination of the materials on record as well as the plaint and the execution petition attached to the present application, this Court is of the considered view that the Executing Court while executing a decree cannot go beyond the decree. Moreover, on a close scrutiny it appears that no order has been passed against the execution petitioners, at least the same has not been challenged in the present application. In view of the aforesaid settled legal position, this Court disposes of the present application by granting liberty to the petitioners to raise this aspect before the learned Executing Court and such objection shall be duly considered and disposed of by passing a reasoned order before proceeding with the execution case.

6. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 13-Jan-2026 19:53:39