A local investigation commission cannot be appointed to collect evidence that parties are capable of producing themselves. Such an order requires specific justification detailing why standard evidentiary procedures are insufficient, and it is generally premature if issued before the formulation of legal issues in the suit.

JUDGMENT :

MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.

1. By this common order, this Court proposes to dispose of two civil revision petitions, namely, CRP (IO) No. 54/2024 and CRP (IO) No.60/2024, as in both the cases the order dated 25.01.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dibrugarh, in Misc.(J) Case No. 15/2024, arising out of Misc.(J) Case No. 01/2024 has been put to challenge under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Deka, the learned Counsel for the petitioner in both the above-mentioned cases. Also heard Mr. N.J. Gogoi, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 7 in both the cases.

3. By the impugned order dated 25.01.2024, passed in Misc.(J) Case No. 15/2024, arising out of Misc.(J) Case No. 01/2024, in connection with T.S. No. 01/2024, the application under Order 26 Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 7, who are the plaintiffs in T.S. No. 01/2024, praying for issuance of a commission for verifying, as to whether constructions, which are carried out by the DEE and A Solution Pvt. Ltd. and Sri Meghnath Das, [who are the respondent Nos. 10 and 11 respectively in CRP(IO) No. 54/2024, as well as the petitioner and respondent No. 10 respectively in CRP(IO) No. 60/2024],is over the land as described in the Schedule-'D' and 'E', i.e., Dag No. 441(O), Periodic Patta No. 278(O), Dag No. 738(N),Periodic Patta No. 566(N), Dag No. 441(O), Periodic Patta No. 278, all in the land covered by Scheduled-'A' and 'B', i.e., Dag No. 122, Periodic Patta No. 22 and Dag No. 38, was allowed.

4. The respondent Nos. 1 to 7, along with two others, as plaintiff's, have filed the T.S. No. 01/2024, before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Dibrugarh, arraying the petitioner as one of the defendants, praying for declaration of right, title & interest, eviction, recovery of khas possession and permanent injunction. Along with the plaint, the respondent Nos. 1 to 7 had also filed a Misc.(J) Case No. 01/2024, under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 94 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying for grant of temporary injunction. In the said Misc. Case, the Trial Court, by order dated 03.01.2024 at the time of issuance of notice to the opposite parties, was pleased to grant ad-interim injunction restraining the opposite parties from raising any construction over the Scheduled-'A', 'B', 'D' and 'E', land till the next date of the case, i.e. till 02.02.2024.

5. After coming to know about the passing of the ad-interim injunction dated 03.01.2024, the respondent No. 10 of CRP (IO) No. 54/2024, namely, DEE and A Solution Pvt. Ltd. appeared in the case and filed an application under Order 39 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying for vacating and setting aside ex-parte interim injunction order. The said application was registered as Misc. (J) Case No.14/2024.

6. Thereafter, by order dated 25.01.2024, passed in Misc. (J) Case No. 14/2024, the Trial Court was pleased to modify the ad-interim order dated 03.01.2024, to the extent that the respondent No. 10 of CRP (IO) No. 54/2024, namely, DEE and A Solution Pvt. Ltd. was allowed to carry out the construction activities over the Scheduled-'D' land. It was also clarified that the ad-interim order dated 03.01.2024 shall not affect the Scheduled-'E' land.

7. In the meanwhile, on 20.01.2024, on an offdate, the plaintiffs (respondent Nos. 1 to 7 herein) filed an application under Order 26 Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure