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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 1028

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vikas Mahajan, J
Mahender Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Swati Sharma – Respondent
CS(OS) 470/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Abhinav Garg
For the Respondents: Nishant Menon, Jhum Jhum Sarkar

The court possesses the authority to appoint a local commissioner in a partition suit to investigate the feasibility of physically dividing a property by metes and bounds after a preliminary decree is granted.

Headnote:The court dealt with an ongoing partition suit where a preliminary decree had been passed declaring the parties entitled to equal half-shares in a suit property. Following an unsuccessful mediation attempt, the parties requested the court to appoint a local commissioner to assess the feasibility of partitioning the property by metes and bounds. The main issue was whether the subject property could be physically partitioned in accordance with the established shares of the parties. The court, citing its procedural discretion in partition proceedings, determined that a local commissioner was necessary to inspect the site, seek expert architectural assistance, and report back on potential methods of division or compensation for unequal portions. The court ordered the appointment of a local commissioner to conduct an inspection and file a report within eight weeks, with the costs to be shared equally by the parties.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and request for appointment of local commissioner following failed mediation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court order mandating the appointment of a local commissioner and defining the scope of their duties regarding property partition. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

1. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties invite attention of the Court to the order dated 25.03.2025 passed by this Court whereby the preliminary decree was passed declaring that the plaintiff and defendant are entitled to half share each in the property bearing No. B-203, Lok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi-110034.

2. Vide said order, the Court had also referred the parties to mediation under the aegis of Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre [in short, ‘Centre’] to find the possibility of amicable settlement.

3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the mediation has been unsuccessful. Accordingly, both the parties urge the Court that a Local Commissioner be appointed to explore as to whether the property could be divided by metes and bounds.

4. In view of the above, Mr. Shiven Khurana [Mobile No.9958981505] is appointed as Local Commissioner to visit the suit property and interact with the parties and suggest whether the suit property can be partitioned by metes and bounds amongst the parties to the suit, having regard to their respective shares.

5. The Local Commissioner will visit the aforesaid property after giving due notice to the counsel for the parties. The parties and/or their respective counsels may remain present at the time of execution of commission.

6. The Local Commissioner shall be at liberty to engage the services of an Architect for the purpose of deciding whether the property can be partitioned by metes and bounds. The fee of the Architect, as well as, other incidental and out of pocket expenses shall be borne by both the parties equally.

7. Both the parties shall extend support and cooperation to the Local Commissioner and give him access to the portions of the suit property in their respective possession to enable him to carry out inspection, and provide all necessary documents/site plan etc. as be requested by the Local Commissioner.

8. In case, exact division of suit property by metes and bounds is not possible as per the respective shares of the parties, the Local Commissioner will suggest other ways and means to offset any extra area/portion for and against any of the parties, if possible.

9. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs. 2 Lakhs to be shared equally by both the parties. The out-of-pocket expenses for preparing site plan etc. shall be borne by the parties jointly.

10. The Local Commissioner shall file report within eight weeks. The copy of the report shall also be furnished to the counsels for the parties, who shall then be at liberty to file their objections thereto, if any, before the next date of hearing.

11. Re-notify on 13.04.2026 for consideration of Report of Local Commissioner.

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 Back to top