Judgment · High Court

ORDER 28.07.2026

#1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

#2. In filing the present CMP, the Petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 08.09.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Aska in C.S. No.107/216. Apart from the above, the Petitioners have also sought for a direction from this Court to the learned trial Court for allowing the petition filed on 12.08.2025 with a prayer for production of the documents (Inam-B Register in respect of service (Karan) inam land covered under RSD No.267 of 1929 as well as the ROR pertaining to Khata No.216 of Mouza Gothagaon) and consequential deposition of the Public Authority i.e. the Tahasildar, Shergarh.

#3. Heard.

#4. Challenging the impugned order dated 08.09.2025, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Inam- B in question is a pre-settlement document which is very much essential for framing of issues and without the said Inam-B the learned trial Court cannot decide the title of the property in question. He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this CMP.

#5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties submits that the Petitioners have never applied for the Inam-B Register and the other documents noted hereinabove. He also contends that instead of making necessary application before the authority concerned to get the Inam-B and other documents the Petitioners had straightway preferred the petition on 12.08.2025 before the learned trial Court for the said purpose, which is dismissed vide impugned order dated 08.09.2025. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of the present CMP.

#6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and since the Petitioners had straightway filed the petition for issuance of summon to the Tahasildar, Sheragda for producing the Inam-B Register and other documents noted above before the learned trial Court without even making necessary application for the said purpose, this Court is of the view that the learned trial Court has rightly rejected the petition at the instance of the Petitioners filed for the said purpose vide impugned order dated 08.09.2025 passed in C.S. No.107 of 2016. This Court, therefore, declines to entertain the prayer made in the present CMP. However, liberty is granted to the Petitioners to file an appropriate application before the concerned authority i.e. the Tahasildar for obtaining the above noted documents.

#7. This CMP is, accordingly, dismissed. Ayaskanta Judge (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)