HIRDESH
Jitendra Singh (Died) thr. LRs. – Appellant
Versus
Seema – Respondent
ORDER
1. The instant miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 rule 1(u) read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the appellants–defendants No. 1 and 2 against the order dated 30.6.2022 passed by the Third District Judge, Joura, District Morena (hereinafter referred to as “the first Appellate Court”) in Regular Civil Appeal No. 07 of 2019, whereby the judgment and decree dated 7.9.2019 passed by the First Additional Judge to the Court of First Civil Judge, Class-I, Joura, District Morena (hereinafter referred to as “the trial Court”) in Civil Suit No. 37-A of 2016 has been set aside and the matter has been remanded to the trial Court for deciding the suit afresh on merits after obtaining a Commissioner’s report regarding alleged encroachment over the suit plot.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that respondent No.1–plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of possession and compensation. According to the plaintiff, she is the owner and possessor of a plot measuring 20 feet in width and 50 feet in length, forming part of Survey No.1143, total area 2 Bigha 8 Biswa situated at Village Alapur, Pargana Joura, District Morena. The plot was purchased by her vide
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Dr. Anuvad Shrivastava For the Respondent : Shashank Pandey
The appellate court can appoint a commissioner for local inspection without remanding the case, determining property disputes requires factual evidence including boundary verification.
The court clarified that allowing additional evidence for demarcation in boundary disputes is essential and does not constitute filling up a lacuna, reinforcing the importance of accurate boundary de....
(1) Remand of matter—Wholesale remand cannot be readily ordered by higher court unless facts and circumstances fully justify the same.(2) Appeal—Appellate court must come into close quarter with reas....
In boundary disputes, joint measurement is essential for accurate determination of encroachment, and remand for fresh trial is justified when evidence is insufficient.
The plaintiff's appeal against the dismissal of her suit was rejected as the demarcation report showed lawful encroachment on government land.
The main legal point established is that the burden of proof lies with the Plaintiff to establish their right, title, and interest over the land, and the decision is based on the evidence and documen....
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.