Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Kirpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Balkar Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
This is a revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 09.09.2021 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nakodar, District Jalandhar in Civil Suit No. 303 of 2014 titled as 'Balkar Singh Versus Naranjan Singh' whereby the Court has dismissed the application (Annexure P-7) filed by the petitioners/defendants for appointment of a Local Commissioner to visit the spot for measurement of property in question.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondent-plaintiff had filed a suit for grant of a decree for possession of plot bearing evacuee property No. 17 measuring 10 marlas, 4 sarsai, 22 square feet, as shown red in the attached site plan situated in the abadi of Village Tanda Urra, Police Station Mehatpur, Tehsil Nakodar, District Jalandhar after removal of malba. It is submitted that in para 4 of the said suit, the plaintiff had himself admitted that his brother had filed a suit qua the property in question and one of the petitioners i.e., petitioner No.5 along with other persons had made a statement that they had no concern with the pro
An order refusing to appoint a local commissioner does not decide any issues or rights in a suit and is therefore non-revisable.
An order dismissing an application for appointing a Local Commissioner does not adjudicate rights and is hence not revisable, as established by prior authority.
The discretion to appoint a local commissioner rests with the court, and the party must lead evidence to prove ownership and possession over the property.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the non-maintainability of the revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, as reiterated from the law laid down in Pritam Singh's c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's interpretation of the appointment of a Local Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC and its exercise of discretion in allowing the appo....
The court affirmed that a Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to determine possession of property; parties must present evidence to establish their claims.
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
