SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Ori) 88

S.ACHARYA
Alekh Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
Bhramar Pal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A. Das and M.S. Panda, for Petitioners; B. Pal, N. Prusty and A. Mohanty, for Opposite Parties.

Judgement

ORDER :- The impugned order enables the plaintiffs, opposite parties in this case, to examine a pleader-surveyor as plaintiffs witness whose survey report has already been filed in the court below. On 2-9-77 when the suit was part-heard and adjourned to 6-9-77 for examining witnesses, the plaintiffs filed a petition praying for deputing a survey-knowing Commissioner to measure the disputed area. A copy of that petition had been served on the defendants, the petitioners in this case. That petition could not be disposed of on that day and was taken up for consideration on 6-9-77. On 6-9-77 the court examined further witnesses for the plaintiffs, but rejected the said petition. While rejecting that petition it mentioned in the order sheet that the plaintiffs were at liberty to take out a private Commissioner for the above purpose and may submit his report in court within two days. The plaintiffs thereafter took a pleader-surveyor for the measurement of the disputed area, and his report was submitted on 12-9-77 within the extended period allowed by the court. On 15-9-77 the plaintiffs filed a petition to enable them to examine that survey-knowing advocate in that suit. The cou

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top