Back
VIKAS BAHL
Mohd. Ashraf – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Razak – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J.
1. This is a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 20.07.2024 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Malerkotla whereby the application of respondent No. 1 for the appointment of a Local Commissioner has been allowed.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that the respondent No. 1 had filed a suit with the following prayers:
The appointment of a Local Commissioner is justified to ascertain facts regarding encroachments and assist in adjudicating property disputes.
The court established that the refusal to appoint a Local Commissioner does not affect the rights of the parties and is not subject to revision.
An order dismissing an application for appointing a Local Commissioner does not adjudicate rights and is hence not revisable, as established by prior authority.
An order refusing to appoint a local commissioner does not decide any issues or rights in a suit and is therefore non-revisable.
Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to collect evidence; compliance with prior decree must be demonstrated by the Judgment Debtor.
The onus of proof lies on the respective parties by adducing evidence at the appropriate stage, and the court should not assist in collecting favorable evidence.
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
