IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Amol Rattan Singh, J.
Baraham Sarup - Appellant
Versus
Gagandeep And Others - Respondent
CR No. 1680 of 2018(O&M)
Decided On : 18-12-2018
Demarcation - High Court Rules and Orders - Rule/Clause 4 of Part (i) (procedure in 'Hadd Shikni cases) - Sub-clauses (i) to (vii) - The judgment discusses the challenge to the order of the executing court regarding the method of demarcation of the suit property. The court refers to sub-clauses (i) to (vii) of Rule/Clause 4 of Part (i) of the High Court Rules and Orders, emphasizing the method of demarcation. The court concludes that demarcation by satellite imagery should be undertaken in the absence of fixed determinable points near the disputed area, as per the Government's instructions and the unavailability of such points due to extensive construction in the area.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the order of the executing court regarding the demarcation of the suit property by 'satellite machinery', contending that it is not a method provided in the High Court Rules and Orders. The court considered the method of demarcation as per the rules and the unavailability of fixed determinable points near the disputed area due to extensive construction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that demarcation by satellite imagery should be undertaken in the absence of fixed determinable points near the disputed area, as per the Government's instructions and the unavailability of such points due to extensive construction in the area.
Issues: The issues revolved around the method of demarcation of the suit property and the applicability of 'satellite machinery' as a demarcation method as per the High Court Rules and Orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that demarcation by satellite imagery should be undertaken in the absence of fixed determinable points near the disputed area, as per the Government's instructions and the unavailability of such points due to extensive construction in the area.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the executing court was directed to conclude the proceedings within four months. The court also highlighted the recurring issue of demarcation and recommended the consideration of an appropriate amendment in the High Court Rules and Orders.
JUDGMENT
Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) - Pursuant to the order dated 06.12.2018 Mr. Daldeep S.Sukarchakia, learned DAG, Punjab, has produced in court today a communication dated February 13, 2015, addressed by the Under Secretary Revenue, Govt. of Punjab, to all the Deputy Commissioners in the State, a copy of which, though is not accompanied by any application or affidavit, is nevertheless taken on record it having been submitted in court by learned State counsel, given to him by an official from the office of SDM, Sunam.
2. Consequently it is ordered to be taken on record in the petition, as Mark 'A', along with its vernacular version as Mark 'B'.
3. A perusal thereof shows that it has been decided by the Government that if a demand is made by an applicant to conduct demarcation through Private Theodolite (Total Station), then the needful can be done through some private agency, with the expense to be borne by the applicant but with demarcation to be conducted by that agency to be attested by the concerned Patwari/Kanungo and 'concerned authority'.
4. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the learned executing court (Civil Judge, Jr. Divn.), Sunam, dated 07.12.2017, by which the respondents-decree holders have been directed to deposit fee for the demarcation of the suit property by "satellite machinery', other than asking them to deposit the fee of the local commissioner and to cooperate in getting the demarcation done.
5. The petitioner-judgment debtor is aggrieved of the aforesaid order, with learned counsel for him submitting that 'satellite machinery' is not a method of demarcation provided in the High Court Rules and Orders, in support of which he refers to sub-clauses (i) to (vii) of Rule/Clause 4 of Part (i) (procedure in "Hadd Shikni cases), contained in Chapter 1-M of Volume 1 of the High Court Rules and Orders, which actually is a reproduction of the Financial Commissioners' instructions, (issued upon a motion made by this Court).
6. He specifically points to sub-clause (i) which reads as follows:-
"(i) If a boundary is in dispute, the Field Kanungo should relay it from the village map prepared at the last settlement. If there is a map which has been made on the square system he should reconstruct the squares in which the disputes land lies. He should mark on the ground on the lines of the squares the places where the map shows that the disputed boundary intersected those lines, and then to find the position of points which do not fall on the lines of the squares. He should with his scale read on the map, the position and distance of those points from a line of a square, and then with a chain and cross staff mark out the position and distance of those points. Thus he can set out all the points and boundaries which are shown in the map. But if there is not a map on the square system available, he should then find three points on different sides of the place in dispute, as near to it as he can, and, if possible, not more than 200 kadams apart which are shown in the map and which the parties admit to have been undisturbed. He will chain from one to another of these points and compare the result with the distance given by the scale applied to the map. If the distances, when thus compared, agree in all cases, he can then draw lines joining these three points in pencil on the map and draw perpendiculars with the scale from these lines to each of the points which it is required to lay out on the ground. He will then, lay them out with the cross-staff as before and test the work by seeing whether the distance from one of his marks to another is the same as in the map. If there is only a small dispute as to the boundary between two fields the greater art of which is undisturbed then such perpendiculars as may be required to points on the boundaries of these fields as shown in the field map can be set out from their diagonals, as in the field book and in the map, and curves made as shown in the map."
(em
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.