Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Delay in filing applications or appointment at a late stage is not a valid reason to deny such appointment, provided it is for localization and noting physical features without evidence collection Donadulu Uma Devi, ["Chandan Khandewal vs G. Ramakrishna Reddy - Telangana"], ["Sri Chaitanya High School vs The State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 45216"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
In property disputes, injunction suits, and civil litigation, parties often seek court-appointed commissioners to clarify facts like boundaries or features. But a common question arises: Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence or conducting enquiry beyond noting physical features. Is this accurate? This blog delves into the nuances under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, particularly Order XXVI, drawing from judicial precedents to guide litigants and lawyers.
Understanding these limits is crucial to avoid rejected applications and wasted resources. We'll examine the scope, distinctions, evidentiary value, and practical applications, with insights from key cases. Note: This is general information based on precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a lawyer for your case.
Court-appointed commissioners under Order XXVI CPC have limited authority for local investigations, ascertaining property features or values, examining accounts, or collecting specific factual data like forensic samples. Their role is primarily ministerial—to aid the court in elucidating disputed matters or clarifying evidence, not to create or substitute proof. Reports are opinions or observations, usable only after examination, objections, and court acceptance; they remain subject to variation or rejection. This sharply contrasts with judicial local inspections (Order XVIII Rule 18 CPC), which are solely for the court's understanding and explicitly bar evidence collection. State Of Kerala Represented By Principal Secretary, (Forest & Wildlife) VS Gopi, S/O. Narayanan - 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 230
Key takeaway: Commissioners assist but do not decide or produce substantive evidence without formal processes.
Judicial or tribunal-led local inspections (Order XVIII Rule 18 CPC or akin provisions) enable courts to understand evidence but cannot collect or create evidence. Observations from inspections aren't proof; parties must seek commissions for that. For instance, inspections revealing contradictions (e.g., trees vs. witness testimony) still require evidence-led enquiry via commissions. State Of Kerala Represented By Principal Secretary, (Forest & Wildlife) VS Gopi, S/O. Narayanan - 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 230
In contrast, Order XXVI Rule 10 commissions gather evidence like property identity and physical features to clarify doubtful points in recorded evidence. Trial courts assess reports pre-trial. Sami Velladan vs Muhammed - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2926
Other cases reinforce noting physical features is permissible, even in injunction suits if identity is disputed: The Advocate Commissioner can be appointed for noting down the physical features.... no prejudice would be caused. S. Srinivas Rao vs M. Venkata Singaiah - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 20793 Similarly, appointment of Advocate Commissioner for a limited purpose of noting down the physical features of the suit schedule property the appointment... cannot be denied. Madaka Rama Mohan Rao VS Gonthina Saraswathi - 2022 Supreme(AP) 466
However, courts dismiss broader enquiries: In a suit for possession, repeated commissioner requests failed absent proof of prior survey defects. Pabbiti Vijaya VS Bale Mangamma - 2019 Supreme(AP) 119
Order XXVI Rule 9 allows commissions for local investigations requisite or proper for elucidating any matter in dispute, or ascertaining market-value... or damages. Rule 11 covers accounts. These are ministerial acts; commissioners provide skilled opinions, potentially hearing parties but not adjudicating. Courts use them as 'facilitators' for fact-finding to save time. M. P. Rajya Tilhan Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Maryadit, Pachama, District Sehore VS M/S. Modi Transport Service - 2022 5 Supreme 643
Limits are clear: Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence. R.Chandrasekar vs A.Arunagiri - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 14393 In injunction suits, appointments for noting features, sketches, and photos are okay if not for evidence collection—the court elucidates facts without binding reliance. Jayalakshmi Constructions, Hyderabad VS Nawab Behboob Ali Khan - 2005 Supreme(AP) 1111
Commissioner reports detail the actual state of affairs but are opinions, part of record only on court direction, subject to objections and examination. They aid but don't bind. M. P. Rajya Tilhan Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Maryadit, Pachama, District Sehore VS M/S. Modi Transport Service - 2022 5 Supreme 643
Courts appoint for specifics, like DNA tests, directing sample provision. Reports exclude judicial functions like arbitration (needs agreement). PRIYANKA JANARDHAN PATIL VS JANARDHAN RAGHUNATH PATIL - 2022 5 Supreme 138M. P. Rajya Tilhan Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Maryadit, Pachama, District Sehore VS M/S. Modi Transport Service - 2022 5 Supreme 643
In practice, trial courts review early; challenged reports may summon commissioners. Omissions (e.g., unmentioned features) don't invalidate if core tasks like identification are done. Sami Velladan vs Muhammed - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2926
Cases echo: It is well settled that the appointment of Commissioner cannot be made for the purpose of collecting evidence. Applications revealing evidence-gathering intent get rejected. Bhoma Ram VS Shanti Lal - 2020 Supreme(Raj) 400Shanta Devi VS Pushpa Devi - 2022 Supreme(Raj) 1114
In injunctions, Order XXXIX Rule 7 limits to preservation/inspection, not evidence: such inspection or appointment of a commissioner, cannot be ordered for the purpose of collecting evidence. Caetana Souza, Daughter Of Late Esperanca Da Costa VS Paulina Rodrigues - 2018 Supreme(Bom) 2310
Even pre-written statement, urgent commissions for measurements with title deeds are allowed if not evidence-focused. Ambrose @ Lalan VS Yesudas - 2009 Supreme(Ker) 251
In evidence-heavy disputes, commissions trump informal methods. High Courts uphold under Article 227 if reasoned. Madaka Rama Mohan Rao VS Gonthina Saraswathi - 2022 Supreme(AP) 466
For disputes, strategic applications prevent reversals. Stay informed on CPC evolutions.
This post synthesizes precedents for educational purposes. Seek professional advice.
#CPCOrder26, #AdvocateCommissioner, #PropertyLaw
Vijay Lakshmi {2017 (5) ALT 630} is wrongly interpreted by the learned Trial court that the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is for the purpose of collection of evidence when the relief sought is noting down physical features. ... During arguments in revision, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Trial Court dismissed the petition on the mistaken premise that the petition is filed for the purpose of collecting #H....
It is settled principle of law that an Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for collecting evidence. 8. In the order under revision, the trial Court noted that the evidence is concluded and when the suit has reached its fag end stage, I.A. ... Learned counsel for the respondents (plaintiffs therein) submitted that in a suit filed for injunction simplicitor, application for appointment of an advocate commissioner for noting down the ph....
by oral evidence cannot effectively be proved like measurement and demarcation, identify on ground and physical features noting etc.” ... In this backdrop, when the material on record is taken into consideration, particularly having regard to the order passed by the Trial Court, it cannot be stated that by appointing an Advocate Commissioner for a limited purpose of noting down the physical features#HL_EN....
features a Commissioner can be appointed. ... Having regard to the provision under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it cannot be always opined that advocate commissioner is appointed only for the purpose of collection of evidence. ... Any Advocate-Commissioner appointed by any Court of law would execute warrant issued for noting down the physical featur....
a limited purpose of noting down the physical features of the suit schedule property the appointment of Advocate Commissioner cannot be denied as held by this Court and no prejudice would be caused, if an Advocate Commissioner is appointed for the said limited purpose. ... The Advocate Commissioner can be appointed for noting down the physical features....
a limited purpose of noting down the physical features of the suit schedule property the appointment of Advocate Commissioner cannot be denied as held by this Court and no prejudice would be caused, if an Advocate Commissioner is appointed for the said limited purpose. ... The Advocate Commissioner can be appointed for noting down the physical feature....
If the commissioner is appointed, certainly it amounts to gathering of evidence about the existence of the tombs in the suit schedule property. It is well settled law that, commissioner cannot be appointed for noting down the factum of existence of tombs in the suit schedule property. ... If the commissioner is appointed, certainly it amounts to gathering of evidence about the existence of tombs in the suit schedul....
Mr.R.Gururaj, learned counsel appearing for petitioners would contend that, in a suit for injunction, there is no necessity to appoint advocate commissioner. Further, the Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence. ... Pending suit, the plaintiff has filed an application to appoint Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features, and the Trial Court had allowed the app....
" ... ( 9 ) SHORN of all other details and having regard to the purpose for which the commissioner was appointed under the impugned orders, it is obvious that noting down the physical features of the property, drawing a rough sketch and taking ... In this case the lower Court has confined the scope of enquiry by the commissioner to note down the existence of the physical features of the suit property and to submit ....
The appointment of Commissioner cannot be made for collecting the evidence in favour of either the plaintiff or the defendant. The evidence which cannot otherwise be procured only has to be obtained by issuing a commission. This preposition of law was laid In Re. ... Therefore, the petitioner seeks for appointment of Commissioner in this matter for noting down the physical features of the schedule property with ref....
It was also opined that commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence because the onus to collect and produce evidence rests on the party itself. The only question that requires adjudication in the suit is the ownership of disputed land.
The averments made in the application seeking appointment of Commissioner itself are sufficient to reach to a conclusion that the appointment was sought only for the purpose of collecting evidence and therefore, the trial court was Justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner. 8. It is well settled that the appointment of Commissioner cannot be made for the purpose of collecting evidence. Looking to the nature of dispute between the parties, the respective plea has to be established by the parties by way of leading appropriate evidence.
It is now well settled that such inspection or appointment of a commissioner, cannot be ordered for the purpose of collecting evidence. In the present case they are claiming to be tenants on the basis of an oral agreement. It is trite that under Order XXXIX Rule 7 of C.P.C., the Court may on an application of any party and on such terms as it thinks fit, make an order for the detention, preservation or inspection of any property which is the subject matter of such suit, or as to which any question may arise therein. Looking to the nature of the suit filed it is a suit simpl....
The plaintiffs, however, contended that they have no objection to measure out the properties. But, for the purpose of collecting evidence, the Commissioner cannot be appointed, even before filing the written statement by the defendants.
On the side of the defendants, D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 to B3 were marked. A Commissioner was appointed for the purpose of noting the physical features of the property. The learned Commissioner had visited the suit property and filed Exs.C1 and C3 reports and Exs.C2 and C4 plans.
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
