Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Court's Power to Appoint Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 - The court has wide discretion to appoint a local commissioner for investigations that elucidate disputes, such as demarcation, possession, or boundary clarification. It is specifically empowered to make investigations necessary for elucidating any matter in dispute, as well as for ascertaining property boundaries, possession, or damages ["2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 1358"] ["04300000050598"] ["2024 0 Supreme(Telangana) 543"].
Scope and Purpose of Order 26 Rule 9 - The primary purpose of appointing a commissioner under this rule is to assist the court in making local investigations relevant to the dispute. It is not limited to collecting evidence but includes demarcation, boundary verification, or physical inspection to aid in understanding the factual aspects of the case ["04300000050598"] ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 570"] ["2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 1909"].
When and at What Stage Can a Court Appoint a Commissioner? - The rule can be exercised at any stage of the suit, depending on the necessity for elucidation or investigation, especially in cases involving boundary disputes, encroachment, or possession. The order is at the court’s discretion and is not confined to a particular stage ["043000000536"] ["2022 0 Supreme(Bom) 1639"] ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 71"].
Limitations and Judicial Discretion - The appointment is limited to investigations that clarify issues like boundaries or possession; it cannot be used solely to gather evidence or determine rights, which are matters for trial. Refusal to appoint a commissioner does not prejudice the rights of parties, as it does not decide issues but only assists in fact-finding ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 570"] ["
Asraf Ansari S/o Late Kamrujama Ansari VS Jitendra Prasad S/o Ram Charan Sah - Patna
"] ["2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 713"].Court's Discretion and Object of Appointment - The courts generally exercise their discretion based on the necessity for local investigation, especially in disputes over boundary, possession, or encroachment. The object is to facilitate fact-finding, not to decide rights or collect evidence, which remains the trial court's function ["2024 0 Supreme(Telangana) 543"] ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 3947"] ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 57480"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The consensus across the cited cases is that under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC, courts have the authority to appoint a commissioner at any stage of the suit when local investigation is deemed necessary to elucidate disputed facts such as possession, boundary demarcation, or encroachment. This rule is broad in scope, emphasizing investigation over evidence collection, and the exercise of this power is at the court's discretion. Refusing to appoint a commissioner does not affect the rights of the parties, as the rule's purpose is to assist in fact-finding, not to decide issues or gather evidence for the parties. Therefore, the court can indeed appoint a commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 to determine possession or related factual issues, provided the court finds such investigation necessary for the just disposal of the case.
In property disputes, questions about possession often arise, leading parties to seek court intervention. A common query is: whether court can appoint commissioner under to determine possession. This issue frequently surfaces in civil suits involving land, boundaries, or encroachments. Understanding the scope of of the , is crucial for litigants, lawyers, and courts alike.
This blog post delves into the legal nuances, drawing from judicial precedents and statutory provisions. Note that this is general information based on established case law and should not be considered specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
Generally, a court cannot appoint a commissioner under CPC solely to assess possession. This provision grants discretionary power to the court for local investigations aimed at matters in dispute, not for deciding core issues like possession. The commissioner's report serves as an aid to the court, which must ultimately decide based on evidence. 1996 0 Supreme(Ker) 136
Key points include:- Appointment is discretionary, not mandatory.- Purpose is limited to clarifying factual matters, such as measurements.- Possession determination remains the court's prerogative. 1990 0 Supreme(P&H) 265
states: In any suit in which the Court deems a to be requisite or proper for the purpose of any matter in dispute... the Court may issue a commission to a person... to make such investigation. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52623
This power is exercised judiciously. Courts appoint commissioners when local inspection helps clarify ambiguities, but not as a substitute for trial. The rule emphasizes , meaning to make clear or explain, rather than rights. 1996 0 Supreme(Ker) 136
As held in multiple cases, the court must find it proper before appointing one—no party has an absolute right to demand it. 2014 0 Supreme(All) 3129 2012 0 Supreme(All) 1689
Judicial rulings consistently clarify that commissioners under this rule cannot determine possession. For instance:- Local Commissioner under CPC cannot be appointed to determine which party is in possession. That issue can only be adjudicated upon by the Court. 1990 0 Supreme(P&H) 265 2017 0 Supreme(P&H) 2033- In another ruling, the court stressed: the commissioner cannot determine possession, and the scope of enquiry must be decided by the court based on evidence. 1959 0 Supreme(Ori) 99
Relying on a commissioner's report to settle possession bypasses the court's duty to evaluate evidence. This limitation prevents misuse as a shortcut in disputes. 2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 2871
Several precedents underscore these boundaries:1. In 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 36, appointment for photographs or was allowed, but not for ascertaining possession.2. 1959 0 Supreme(Ori) 99 reiterated that possession questions are for the court alone.3. 1990 0 Supreme(P&H) 265 highlighted the discretionary nature and barred possession inquiries.4. Echoing this, 1996 0 Supreme(Ker) 136 noted parties may adduce evidence via commissioners, but only for elucidation, not determination.
These cases emphasize evidence-based adjudication over delegated fact-finding on title or possession.
While possession is off-limits, courts may appoint commissioners for supportive tasks. Common permissible purposes include:- and boundaries: In boundary disputes, commissioners can identify survey numbers or plot lines. For example, in a case where parties contested adjacent land, the appointed one to determine the survey number of the land, upheld as necessary for elucidation. 2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 92- Measurements and encroachments: Where identification is disputed, assistance from survey authorities is appropriate. Where there is a dispute about the identification/encroachment of the property, the Court ought to appoint a Court Commissioner under . 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 2089- Photographs or spot inspections: To visualize site conditions, but not to collect evidence or decide rights. 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 36
However, even these are discretionary. If is already done, fresh appointment may be rejected: when has already been done, there would be no need for fresh by appointing Commissioner. 2023 0 Supreme(MP) 183
In development cost assessments or scientific probes, courts weigh necessity. Applications seen as delaying tactics are dismissed. 2024 Supreme(BD)(SC) 14662 2012 0 Supreme(All) 1689
Revision against such orders is limited; intervene only for . 2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 92 2020 0 Supreme(P&H) 1555
Courts exercise caution:- No appointment merely on a party's asking—it's not a legal right. 2014 0 Supreme(All) 3129- If evidence suffices without inspection, or if it's for evidence collection, requests fail. 2023 0 Supreme(MP) 183- In , possession is proven via documents, not commissioner reports alone. 2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 2871
Courts should:- Limit scopes clearly to avoid overreach.- Evaluate commissioner reports as advisory, not binding on possession.
In summary, CPC is a valuable tool for factual elucidation in property suits but cannot be invoked solely to determine possession. Courts retain exclusive authority, ensuring fair trials. Permissible for boundaries or measurements, it demands discretion to prevent abuse.
Key Takeaways:- No to possession determination by commissioners. 1990 0 Supreme(P&H) 265- Yes to /measurements if elucidative. 2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 92- Always discretionary—prove necessity.- Consult professionals; outcomes vary by facts.
Stay informed on CPC applications to strengthen your case in land disputes.
#Order26Rule9 #CPCCommissioner #LandDisputes
local commissioner - Land Dispute - Order 26 Rule 9 CPC - [Order 26 Rule 9 CPC] - The court discussed the ... appointment of a local commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for demarcation of the suit land and the surrounding areas to determine ... Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's request for the appointment of a local commissioner under Order ... The petitioner/plaintiff being aggrieved by order dated 01.11.2017 (Annexure P-8) passed by t....
The case of the petitioner before the trial Court is that he has filed a petition under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying the Court to appoint an advocate commissioner to determine the survey number of the land (suit schedule property) which is in the possession and enjoyment of ... The plaintiff claims that to be in survey No.734/A while the defendant claims that the plaintiff is in possession#HL_EN....
Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code gives wide powers to the court to appoint a commissioner to make local investigations which may be requisite or proper for elucidating any matter in dispute, ascertaining the market value of any property, account of mesne profit or damages or annual net profits. ... Shanti Sarup and others, 2008 (8) SCC 671 the Honourable Supreme Court observed that it is appropriate for the Court to direct the investigation by appointin....
26 rule 9 can be exercised at any stage, but for limited purpose -- when demarcation has already been done, there would be no need ... already done -- application rejected on ground that Commissioner cannot be appointed for collection of evidence -- powers under order ... Commissioner under Order 26 rule 9, CPC. ... Point No.2: In cases where there is a dispute as to encroachment, the fact whether there is such an encroachment or not cannot be determ....
In order to examine the issue at hand, it is beneficial to referto Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code, 1908 which reads as under: Commissions for local investigations: "In any suit in which the Court deems a local investigation to be ... Under Rule of Order 26 in any suit in which the Court deems a local investigation is necessary or proper for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute, it can issue a commission. .....
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petition for appointment of Pleader Commissioner and the interpretation of Order ... During pendency of trial and before the judgment if the trial Court finds that any issue requires clarification or elucidation, the Court may suo motu appoint Commissioner to submit report for which no application is required. The scope of Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC is very limited. ... It is clear from re....
In the said pending appeal, the present-petitioners filed an application under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for assessing the money spent for development of the case land. ... of the appeal an application was filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointing an Advocate Commissioner with malafide intention in o....
9. It is also to be seen, Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC empowers Courts to appoint commissions for local investigations when necessary to elucidate matters in dispute, ascertain property values, or determine mesne profits or damages. ... In Haryana Waqf Board’s case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a case of demarcation of disputed land, it is appropriate for the Court to direct investigation by appointing a local Commissioner under....
The 1st respondent/plaintiff files I.A.No.20 under Order 26 Rule 9 r/w Section 75 of the CPC seeking appointment of the Court Commissioner. ... An application under Order 26 Rule 9 of the CPC in I.A.No.15 comes to be filed by the 1st respondent before the concerned Court seeking appointment of the Court Commissioner. ... The petitions call in question an #HL_STA....
[2015(5) ALD 460] , this Court also considered the scope of Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. This Court also placed reliance on the Judgment of this Court in Machineni Rama Devi and others v. ... During pendency of the said suit and the said application, respondent has filed an interlocutory application vide I.A.No.705 of 2022 under Order 26 Rule 9 read with Section 151 C.P.C to appoint#HL_E....
7. A Division Bench of this court in Harvinder Kaur and Another Vs. Godha Ram and another,1979 PLJ 562 had examined the following question:- "In the light of the aforesaid observation, without dilating any more on this subject, the meaning that can be given to the explanation is that an order made in the course of a suit or proceeding would be revisable only when it determines or adjudicates some right or obligation of the parties in controversy. "Whether revision lies against an order passed under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, refusing to appoint a Local Commissione....
In the case on hand, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, without adding the owners, as party to the proceedings, believing with the Advocate Commissioner's report, the first Appellate Court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff is in possession of B-schedule property also, is not within the legal frame work. The first Appellate Court, without seeing the above said principles hold that the report filed by the Advocate Commissioner proved the possession and title of the plaintiff. In fact, under Order 26, Rule 9 of C.P.C., the Advocate Comm....
Shanti Sarup an others, (2008) 8 SCC 671 and REMCO Inds, Workers House Bldg. Co-op. Vs. Lakshmeesha M. and others, (2003) AIR SC 3167, in order to submit that where there is a dispute about the identification/encroachment of the property, the Court ought to appoint a Court Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C.
A local inspection, whether necessary or not, depends on several facts, factors and circumstances which have been considered by the court below and in absence of anything to show that court finds it necessary to obtain Commissioner's report, such appointment cannot be forced. 6. It is well settled that under Order 26 Rule 10 and 11 of Code of Civil Procedure the Court is not bound to appoint Commissioner on mere asking of parties but it is for the court when it found necessary to appoint Commissioner for some further investigation or information, it can do so. Power of the ....
Power of the court to appoint Commissioner is not disputed but it is not the legal right of parties to force the court to appoint Commissioner. A local inspection, whether necessary or not, depends on several facts, factors and circumstances which have been considered by the court below and in absence of anything to show that court finds it necessary to obtain Commissioner's report, such appointment cannot be forced. 4. It is well settled that under Order 26 Rule 10 and 11 of Code of Civil Procedure the Court is not bound to appoint Commissioner on mere asking of parties but it is ....
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
