Back
ARUN KUMAR JHA
Divya Kumari, Wife of Sri Brajesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava, Son of Late Onkar Nath Srivastava – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arun Kumar Jha, J.
The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the part of the order dated 17.01.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-VI, Danapur, Patna in Title Appeal No. 79/2019 (Divya Kumari & Ors. vs. Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava) whereby and whereunder the application of the present petitioners dated 07.04.2022 filed for scientific measurement of the land in question has been dismissed. The petitioners have further prayed for direction to the learned first appellate court to appoint a Survey Knowing Advocate Commissioner to conduct and hold scientific measurement of the disputed plot of land by allowing the petitioners’ petition dated 07.04.2022 filed under Order 26 Rule 10 A of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) while holding that the learned first appellate court failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it.
2. The conspectus of the case of the parties is that in the year 2011, Title Suit No. 112/2011 (Smt. Sudha Devi & Ors. vs. Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava) was filed by the plaintiffs in the court of learned Sub Judge, Danapur, Patna seeking, inter alia, declarat
The court affirmed that previous orders rejecting applications for scientific measurement in ongoing litigation are final and cannot be re-agitated, emphasizing the principles of res judicata and tim....
The court established that the appointment of a commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the CPC is not to be used as a means to collect evidence after the closure of proceedings, and such application....
The court established that additional evidence cannot be admitted in appellate proceedings if the party had prior opportunities to present it, and that the appointment of a commissioner should not be....
Reliance on a local commissioner's report in judicial decisions must comply with natural justice principles; failure to allow cross-examination and address objections renders a judgment unsustainable....
Law relating to appointment of Court Commissioner is fairly well settled and that the Court Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collection of evidence.
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
