Back
ANAND PATHAK
Uma Bhardwaj W/o Shri Sanjay Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
Maniram S/o Shri Kashiram – Respondent
यह मामला भूमि विवाद और सीमांकन से संबंधित है, जिसमें वादी ने अपने स्वामित्व और अधिकार का दावा किया है। वादी ने ट्रायल कोर्ट में अनुरोध किया था कि सीमांकन या माप के लिए एक राजस्व अधिकारी को कोर्ट कमीशन के रूप में नियुक्त किया जाए। ट्रायल कोर्ट ने इस आवेदन को अस्वीकार कर दिया था, यह कहते हुए कि राजस्व अधिकारी को कमीशन के रूप में नियुक्त नहीं किया जा सकता।
हालांकि, उच्च न्यायालय ने पाया कि यह निर्णय गलत था। कानून और नियम स्पष्ट करते हैं कि यदि किसी विवाद में स्थानीय जांच या सीमांकन आवश्यक हो, तो कोर्ट को राजस्व अधिकारी या संबंधित अधिकारी को कमीशन पर भेजने का अधिकार है। नियमों के अनुसार, राजस्व अधिकारी या अन्य उपयुक्त अधिकारी को सीमांकन के लिए आयोग भेजा जा सकता है, और इसके लिए आवश्यक प्रक्रियाएं निर्धारित हैं।
अतः, उच्च न्यायालय ने निर्देश दिया कि ट्रायल कोर्ट को फिर से आवेदन पर विचार करते हुए, एक राजस्व अधिकारी या संबंधित अधिकारी को सीमांकन के लिए आयोग नियुक्त करना चाहिए। इससे विवाद का निपटारा शीघ्र और न्यायसंगत तरीके से हो सकेगा। इस आदेश के माध्यम से यह सुनिश्चित किया गया कि सीमांकन का कार्य वैज्ञानिक और तर्कसंगत तरीके से किया जाए, जिससे पक्षकारों के अधिकार सुरक्षित रहें और विवाद का समाधान जल्दी हो सके।
ORDER :
1. The present petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution taking exception to the order dated 11.04.2018 passed by trial Court whereby application preferred by the plaintiff under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC for appointment of Commissioner has been rejected.
2. Precisely stated facts of the case are that petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property against the defendant. It was the allegation of plaintiff that suit property has been purchased by the plaintiff from erstwhile owner and thereafter, moved application for mutation before Tehsildar Gwalior which was allowed in name of plaintiff which was marked in revenue records. The said land was demarcated and plaintiff has the right title, interest and possession over the suit property. However, defendants are trying to sell the land belonging to plaintiff and it appears that they are exceeding the land which is available to them in revenue records. Therefore, the instant suit was filed.
3. Along with the suit, an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC was filed for appointment of Revenue Officer as Court Commissioner so that demarcation or measureme
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of a Commissioner for local investigation should only be done for convenience and after considering the evidence produced b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of a commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of the CPC is limited to cases where demarcation of the property is in dispute and can....
The Local Commissioner appointed by the Court for demarcation is not authorized to comment on or make findings with respect to the correctness of the revenue record.
Boundary disputes necessitate the appointment of a local Commissioner for clarity, ensuring courts fulfill the legal requirement of definitive evidence before adjudication.
The discretion to appoint a Commissioner for spot inspection and demarcation of property under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC lies with the Trial Court, and the nature of relief is purely discretionary.
The demarcation of land by a Local Commissioner must be carried out strictly in accordance with the instructions of the relevant authorities and land record manuals.
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
