Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Director General (Road Development) National Highways Authority Of India VS Aam Aadmi Lokmanch...
2020 0 Supreme(SC) 445 : Yes, a commission under Order 26 Rule 10-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) can be issued for ascertaining scientific investigations, including those involving construction or the location of construction, when such matters involve complex scientific questions that cannot be conveniently conducted before the court. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has the power to issue such a commission to obtain expert reports, particularly in cases involving environmental and technical issues. This power is derived from Section 19(4) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which grants the NGT the same powers as a civil court under the CPC, including the power to issue commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents. The court in the All Dimasa Student Union case emphasized that Rule 10-A is an enabling provision allowing courts (and by extension, the NGT) to appoint experts to investigate scientific matters, such as environmental impact or construction-related risks, when necessary for justice. Therefore, a commission under Order 26 Rule 10-A (not Rule 9) is applicable for ascertaining the construction or location of construction where scientific investigation is required.Checking relevance for Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, Varanasi VS Rakhi Singh...
2024 4 Supreme 602 : Yes, a commission under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 can be issued for ascertaining the construction or location of construction. The legal documents confirm that the District Judge, under Section 75(c) and Order XXVI Rule 10A of the CPC, directed the Director of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to undertake a scientific investigation/survey/excavation on Settlement Plot No. 9130 to ascertain the nature of the construction and the age of the structure, including whether it was constructed over a pre-existing Hindu temple. The directions specifically included conducting Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) surveys, excavation, dating methods, and other modern techniques to determine the age and nature of construction, including beneath domes, walls, and cellars. This demonstrates that a commission under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC is competent to be issued for ascertaining both the construction and the location of construction, particularly in disputes involving historical or religious structures.Checking relevance for NOIDA ENTREPRENEURS ASSOCIATION VS NOIDA...
Checking relevance for State Of Haryana VS State Of Punjab...
Checking relevance for STATE OF MEGHALAYA VS ALL DIMASA STUDENTS UNION, DIMA-HASAO DISTRICT COMMITTEE...
Checking relevance for Nandala Anvesh vs Mamidala Vijay...
Checking relevance for Nandala Anvesh vs Bathini Raju...
Checking relevance for Rachna Gupta VS Parmodh Baru, S/o Sh. Om Parkash Baru...
2024 0 Supreme(J&K) 53 : Commission under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC can be issued for ascertaining facts in respect of any matter in dispute, including the construction or location of construction, provided the purpose is to elucidate or clarify the matter through local investigation. The provision allows the Court to issue a commission for local investigation to ascertain market value of property, amount of mesne profits, damages, or annual net profit, and to elucidate any matter or dispute. The object is to obtain material that, due to its peculiar nature, can best be obtained on the spot, and not to collect evidence for a party. The Court’s power under Order 26 Rule 9 is discretionary and enabling, not mandatory, and is intended to assist in clarifying factual issues, including those related to the physical condition or location of construction, as long as it serves the purpose of elucidation and not evidence collection.Checking relevance for Sapna VS Indore Municipal Corporation...
2021 0 Supreme(MP) 182 : Commission under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC cannot be issued for ascertaining the construction or location of construction. The court held that the appointment of a local commissioner under this rule is limited to cases where demarcation of the property is in dispute, and it cannot be used to collect evidence for parties. In the case at hand, the plaintiff sought a commission to determine whether the defendant was constructing in accordance with the sanctioned map, but the court ruled this was not a valid ground for commission under Order 26 Rule 9, as it amounted to misuse of the provision for collecting evidence, which is the responsibility of the parties themselves. The court emphasized that the report of the commissioner is merely a piece of evidence and not binding, and that the rule is not meant for verifying construction or location of construction, but only for demarcation disputes.Checking relevance for Rekha Suman VS Janardan Prasad...
Checking relevance for C. Mamatha W/o. Subramanyam VS K. Parvathamma, W/o Late K. Reddeppa...
2023 0 Supreme(AP) 1097 : Yes, a commission under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC can be issued for ascertaining the construction or location of construction, particularly in cases involving disputes regarding the boundaries or physical features of the property. The court emphasized that physical verification is necessary in such disputes, and the discretionary power to appoint an Advocate Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC is not restricted to any particular stage of the suit. The appointment was upheld in a suit for permanent injunction where the dispute involved the physical features of the property, including its construction and location.
