{"id":221585,"date":"2000-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000"},"modified":"2017-10-03T04:28:37","modified_gmt":"2017-10-02T22:58:37","slug":"gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","title":{"rendered":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Orissa High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2001 I OLR 162<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: P Misra<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: P Misra<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p> P.K. Misra, J. <\/p>\n<p> 1. Plaintiff has filed this writ application. In O. S. No. 102 of 1981, preliminary decree for partition was passed. During pendency of the final decree proceeding, the plaintiff-petitioner filed an application for amendment of the plaint for incorporation of certain plot numbers and it was also prayed that the preliminary decree may be accordingly amend. On 20-7-1990, the trial court allowed the said petition for amendment by observing that the counsel for defendant No. 1 had agreed that the amendment may be allowed subject to payment of cost. It is not disputed that cost of Rs. 30\/- was paid by the plaintiff which was accepted by defendant No. 1. Accordingly, in the plaint the corrected new properties were inserted. Subsequently, defendant No. 1 after about expiry of three years filed a petition for recalling the earlier order. The trial court having allowed such petition and having recalled the earlier order relating to amendment, the petitioner filed revision which having been dismissed, the present writ application has been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p> 2.   In the present case, in spite of notice  there has been no appearance on behalf of defendant No. 1.\n<\/p>\n<p> 3.    There is  no dispute that  the earlier order  allowing amendment of the plaint  had been  passed  on consent of defendant No. 1.    There is no allegation that  the  recital in the order to the effect that counsel  for defendant No. 1  had agreed to the amendment, was an erroneous  statement.     Such application for -recalling had been filed more than  three years after the order of amendment was passed.    As   a   matter  of  fact, the cost directed to be paid had been accepted by defendant  No. 1.    In  the above back-ground, there is no escape from the conclusion that defendant No. 1 was estopped from  challenging the  earlier order of the trial court allowing  amendment.    Moreover,   the   said   order having been passed on consent could not  have  been recalled in the absence pf any plea  and  proof  that the consent  had been fraudulently obtained or obtained by fraud  or  coercion.    In the above connection, the decisions reported in 81 (1996) C. L. T. 119 (Sakhi Dei (after her)  Laxmi   Dei v.   Banamali  Sahu &amp; others) and A. I. R, 1992 Orissa 168 (Cudise Trinath Rao  v.  Sudhansu Prasad Padni &amp; another) are relevant.\n<\/p>\n<p> 4. In such view of the matter, the order passed by the revisional court and the order passed by the trial court on 24-3-1994 recalling the earlier order dated 20-7-1990 cannot be sustained and are hereby quashed. However, since plaint had been permitted to be amended, defendant No. 1 or other defendants should be given an opportunity for filing additional written statement and if any disputed question arises, the trial court is to consider the same by giving fresh opportunity of bearing to all the parties arid if necessary a fresh preliminary decree may be passed. Such a direction is being given keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n<pre> Subject  to aforesaid   direction,   the   writ   application is allowed.    There will be no order as to costs. \n \n\n 5. Writ application allowed. \n \n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Orissa High Court Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000 Equivalent citations: 2001 I OLR 162 Author: P Misra Bench: P Misra JUDGMENT P.K. Misra, J. 1. Plaintiff has filed this writ application. In O. S. No. 102 of 1981, preliminary decree for partition was passed. During pendency of the final [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-221585","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\"},\"wordCount\":512,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Orissa High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\",\"name\":\"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000","datePublished":"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000"},"wordCount":512,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Orissa High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000","name":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, ... on 19 October, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-02T22:58:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gangadhar-rout-vs-additional-district-judge-on-19-october-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gangadhar Rout vs Additional District Judge, &#8230; on 19 October, 2000"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221585","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=221585"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221585\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221585"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221585"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221585"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}