Delhi HC: Bipolar Disorder Alone Does Not Qualify as Medical Disability Without Benchmark Criteria  ||  Kerala HC: Excommunicating Knanaya Catholics For Marrying Outside the Community is Unconstitutional  ||  Kerala HC: Temporary Use of Religious Land For Public Infrastructure is Not a ‘Transfer’ under Law  ||  P&H HC: Habeas Plea in Child Custody Case Not Maintainable if Child is With Natural Guardian and Safe  ||  Delhi HC: Illegal Termination Does Not Automatically Entitle Employee to Reinstatement or Back Wages  ||  Gujarat High Court: Forcing Toddler to Attend Court 6 Hours Weekly For Grandfather Visits is Unjust  ||  Supreme Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Plea, Directs Timely Resolution of Disciplinary Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court Rejects NHAI Review on Solatium Retrospectivity, Bars Reopening Settled Claims  ||  SC: Excise Duty Exemptions Based on Intended Use Must be Construed Liberally For Assessee  ||  Supreme Court: DSC Personnel Eligible For Second Pension; Allows Condonation of Shortfall    

Naseeb Deen and Ors. Vs. Harnek Singh - (High Court of Himachal Pradesh) (19 Jul 2019)

Satisfaction of the Court is pre-requisite for appointment of a Revenue Officer as a Local Commissioner

MANU/HP/0795/2019

Civil

By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, the Petitioners have challenged order, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge, vide which an application filed by the Respondent under Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for appointment of a Revenue Officer as a Local Commissioner stands allowed.

It is not in dispute that, the application under Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the CPC was filed by the Plaintiff before the learned trial Court even before the issues stood framed by the learned Court below. It is the allegation of the Plaintiff that, the Defendants are encroaching/have encroached upon the suit land.

It is settled preposition of law that he who alleges, has to prove. Meaning thereby, because it is the contention of the Plaintiff that, the Defendants have encroached upon the suit land or are encroaching upon the same, onus is upon him to prove his case. There is no material on record to demonstrate that, the Plaintiff, at any stage, has approached the Revenue Authorities, for demarcation of the land in issue.

Order XXVI, Rule 9 of CPC, provides that in any suit in which the Court deems a local investigation to be requisite or proper for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute, the Court may issue a commission to such person as it thinks fit directing him to make such investigation and to report thereon to the Court.

It has to be the satisfaction of the Court that a local investigation is necessary or proper for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute. This provision is not a tool which is to be permitted to be used by the parties concerned to create evidence in their favour. This important aspect of the matter has also been lost sight of by the learned Trial Court while passing the impugned order. Impugned order passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge is set aside. Petition allowed.

Tags : APPOINTMENT   REVENUE OFFICER   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved