AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. Satpathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is order dated 25th November, 1982 made by the Additional District Magistrate. It is an ex-parte order. He points out, the case was against one Sanat Kumar Mishra, while his client is Sanat Kumar Samantray. Hence, his client was not represented at the hearing.
Mr. Nanada, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and produces petitioner’s application from the record. The application says, inter alia, petitioner is of a single family having eight members and owned about three acres of land. Mr. Nanda refers to rule 2(dd) for meaning of homesteadless person. He submits, there are three clauses to be read together and one of them is applicant’s/family must own less than one standard acre of agricultural land.
Copy of petitioner’s original application has been made in Court and handed over to Mr. Satpathy. We require satisfaction that petitioner has a case to be heard before we proceed to adjudicate whether, impugned order passed ex-parte is required to be set aside as such.
List on 29th November, 2022.
......................................................