RUPA TANDI @ RUPADHAR TANDI vs GIRISH CHANDRA DHANUA, SUB REGISTRAR, TITILAGARH,BOLANGIR

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
CONTC No.6171 of 2025
An application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,
1971

*
Rupa Tandi @ Rupadhar Tandi
Petitioners
& another …



-V ERSUS -
Girish Chandra Dharua,
Contemnor
Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh, Bolangir …

Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr. G.Dash, Advocate

For the Contemnor : Mr. Gyanaloka Mohanty, SC



P R E S E N T:
Page 1 of 5

HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing : 17.03.2026 :: Date of Judgment : 17.03.2026
J UDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA
BEHERA, J.—
1. This Contempt Petition has been filed by the Petitioners
for non-implementation of the directions given in the
judgment dated 16.09.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.24710 of
2025.
In the judgment dated 16.09.2025 passed in W.P.(C)
No.24710 of 2025, the alleged contemnor was directed to
receive the deed for sale of the Petitioners and to act upon the
same as per The Indian Registration Act, 1908 and The Orissa
Registration Rules, 1988.
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the Petitioners and
the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
3. Perused the show-cause affidavit submitted by the
alleged contemnor i.e. Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh.
4. In the show-cause affidavit, the Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh
(alleged contemnor) has assigned reasons for non-
Page 2 of 5

implementation of the above directions given in the judgment
dated 16.09.2025 in W.P.(C) No.24710 of 2025 for non-
registration of the deed for sale of the Petitioners that,
in the meantime, an another Sub-Registrar
office i.e. Sub-Registrar, Saintala has been opened
and the area, in respect of which, the land sought
to be registered i.e. Mouza-Dhanput has been taken
out from the jurisdiction of Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh
to the jurisdiction of newly opened Sub-Registrar,
Saintala. For which, it is not possible on his part to
register the deed in respect of the properties of
Mouza-Dhanput, as the jurisdiction of that area has
been taken out from his jurisdiction.

5. The aforesaid show-cause affidavit submitted by the
alleged contemnor for his exoneration from registering the
deed for sale of the Petitioners in spite of the directions of this
Court in the judgment dated 16.09.2025 passed in W.P.(C)
No.24710 of 2025 is not acceptable under law.
On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in a
Full Bench decision of this Court:-
In the matter of District Judge, Puri reported in 36 (1970)
CLT 1026 (F.B.) that,
Page 3 of 5

When, after the institution of a suit, the area containing the
disputed property transferred out of its local jurisdiction —
Held, the Original Court retains the jurisdiction.

6. When, it has been clarified by this Court in the above
Full Bench decision that, even after taking the area out of the
jurisdiction of Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh in respect of the
properties sought to be registered, the Sub-Registrar,
Titilagarh, who was having his original jurisdiction, he retains
its power to deal with the registration and as on the date of
passing of the judgment by this Court in W.P.(C) No.24710 of
2025, the Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh had the jurisdiction to
register the deed in respect of which, direction was given by
this Court, then at this juncture, there is no impediment
under law for the Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh to implement the
directions made by this Court in the judgment of W.P.(C)
No.24710 of 2025.
For which, the Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh is to implement
the judgment dated 16.09.2025 passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) No.24710 of 2025 immediately.
Page 4 of 5

7. On the basis of the aforesaid clarifications, this contempt
petition is dropped and disposed of.

(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)
JUDGE

High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
17.03.2026// Binayak Sahoo
Jr. Stenographer
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BINAYAK SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Mar-2026 11:21:49
Page 5 of 5