All HC: Can’t Invoke Penalty Proceedings u/s 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 For Search And Seizure Of Godown  ||  All. HC: Businessman Doing Business Activities Within Slum Can’t Be Called a Slum Dweller  ||  SC: No Charity Being Done By State For Paying Compensation to Person Whose Land Was Acquired  ||  Gauhati HC: Can’t Shift Burden of Proof on Accused if Multiple Witnesses of Crime Present  ||  SC: Contempt Notice Issued Against Patanjali For Continued Publishing of Misleading Advertisements  ||  SC: Registry Can’t Decide Whether or Not Review Petiton Merits Relook Through Curative Petiton  ||  Bom. HC: Imprisonment Exceeding Twelve Months Can’t Be Given For Default in Payment of Maintenance  ||  Cal. HC: Cannot Differentiate Between Contractual and Permanent Employees For Maternity Leave  ||  Supreme Court: Entering Into Sale Agreement With Minor is Void and Unenforceable  ||  SC: Information Disclosing Cognizable Offence to Be Recorded as FIR & Not in General Diary    

Nikhil Gupta vs Tanu Gupta - (High Court of Delhi) (05 Jul 2022)

High Court can interfere into the order of Trial Court in the revisional jurisdiction only when Trial Court has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law



The present petition has been filed challenging the order whereby the learned Trial Court has rejected the request of the Petitioner for appointment of Local Commissioner.

The High Court can interfere into the order of the learned Trial Court in the revisional jurisdiction only on the following grounds: a. The Trial Court has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law; b. The Trial Court has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested; or c. The Trial Court has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

The discretion to appoint Local Commissioner may be exercised only in the cases as enumerated under the law. In view of the pendency of matters in the courts, the practice of appointing local commissioner for recording of evidence is being encouraged for the expeditious disposal of the matters. However, the trial Courts while issuing the commission has to take into account, the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

The Trial Court is the best judge to decide on these issues as the trial is being conducted there. This Court in exercise of its revisional power cannot be seen as controlling the day to day affairs of the Trial Court. If, there is consent of the parties then of course, the courts are more inclined to issue the commission. However, if one of the parties is not agreeable then, the courts have to see the attendant facts and circumstances of the case. In such a case, if both the parties are not agreeable, the general experience is that the Local Commissioner faces lots of difficulties in recording of evidences. There is no ground to interfere in the impugned order. Petition dismissed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved