SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SANDEEP V. MARNE, SANDEEP V. MARNE
Yasin Gulab Shikalkar – Appellant
Versus
Maruti Nagnath Aware – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Dilip Bodake, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1 to 5:Mr. Samir Kumbhkoni, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of both the sides, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

2. Order dated 15 December 2021 passed by the District Judge, Solapur rejecting Petitioner’s application for appointment of Court Commissioner for measurement of lands during pendency of Appeal is the subject matter of challenge in the present Petition.

3. Petitioner / plaintiff instituted a Regular Civil Suit No.62 of 2010 for permanent injunction as well as for recovery of possession of encroached portion of land. During pendency of the Suit, Petitioner/plaintiff fled an application under the provisions of Order 26 Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“Code”) for appointment of Court Commissioner for measurement of lands and filing of boundaries. The Trial Court was pleased to allow the application vide its order dated 1 August 2011 and Taluka Inspector of Land Record (“TILR”) came to be appointed as the Court Commissioner for conducting joint measurement of lands bearing Gat Nos. 137/3/A, 137/3/B, 137/2/B/1 and 122 and to indicate the boundaries of lands in possession of the respective parties. TILR conducted measurement of lands and fled his report along w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top