A.K. Mathur, C.J.

1. All the three writ petitions under Ari 227 of the Constitution of India were filed before the learned single Judge who has referred the same for decision by the Division Bench due to the importance of the matter on the point whether a revision lies before the District Court or not. The District Court by its order dated 22.4.1996 set aside the order passed by the trial Court and directed appointment of Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C.

2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the case, it would be proper to point out at the outset that earlier as per the M.P. Amendment Act, power under Section 115 C.P.C. was given to the District Court. Subsequently, by an amendment, that power has been restored back to the High Court. The present case was decided by the District Court under Section 115 C.P.C. as the District Court had, at the relevant time, jurisdiction to decide the matter in revision petition.

3. Brief facts giving rise to these writ petitions are that there is a land in Patwari Halka No. 8 bearing khasra No. 1150/2 area O.20 acre and Khasra No. 1150/1 area 0.20 acre in village Sakti, District Bilaspur. (sic)ne land is alleged to be bel