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

2005 Supreme(P&H) 53

M.M.KUMAR
Naranjan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Satwinder Singh – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution prays for setting aside order dated 27.10.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Barnala declining the request of the plaintiff-petitioner for appointment of the Local Commissioner on the ground that already report of a Local Commissioner Shri Varinder Kumar, Goyal, Advocate appointed by the Court is on record. The objection has been raised to the report on the ground that aforementioned Local Commissioner was appointed exparte and no notice to the defendant-respondents was given. It has further been observed that the plaintiff-petitioner is adducing his evidence and he can very well examine the aforementioned Local Commissioner who in turn can be subjected to cross-examination by the defendant-respondents.

2. After hearing the learned counsel, I find that two Division Benches of this Court in the cases of Smt. Harvinder Kaur and Anr. v. Godha Ram and Anr., 1979 P.L.J. 562 and Pritam Singh v. Sunder Lal, (1990-2)98 P.L.R. 191 have taken the view that the order decling the application for appointment of Local Commissioner cannot be subjected to a revision petition as it cannot be treated as a

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