Madan Lal Vs. Narayan Singh

Madan Lal vs Narayan Singh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Oct 10, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1049296

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1049296
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Oct 10, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Madan Lal

Advocate Shri. Ajay Ojha

Respondent

Narayan Singh

Excerpt

.....have filed this petition under article 227 of the constitution of india being aggrieved by the order dated 13.8.2012 (ann. p-1) passed by the civil judge, class- i, panna in c.s.no.124-a/96 dismissing their application filed under order 26 rule 9 of the cpc for appointment of commissioner to carry out the measurement of the disputed boundaries. initially after taking me through the papers placed on record, petitioner's counsel has argued the case at length for admission and allowing this petition. on asking the petitioner's counsel how the petitioner could be permitted to use the process of the court as an agency for collecting the evidence for him by allowing the impugned application, on which petitioner's counsel instead to argue further seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to raise all the objections and grounds stated in the petition subject to final judgment and decree of the trial court on arising the occasion in duly constituted appeal with further prayer of appropriate direction to the trial court that after recording the evidence of both the parties, if such court finds any ambiguity in the evidence, which it could not be solved without calling the commissioner report of the disputed boundaries, then the court may call such report. considering the aforesaid prayer, the petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to raise the objections and the grounds stated in the petition subject to final judgment of the trial court on arising the occasion in duly constituted appeal. simultaneously the trial court is extended a liberty to call the commissioner report under its discretion if after recording the evidence of the parties such court finds any ambiguity in the evidence, which could not be solved without calling the commissioner report. it is made clear that such direction to the trial court does not mean that any right to the party is given to file an application.....

Full Judgment

W.P.No.15663 o”

10. 10.2012 Shri Ajay Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Smt.

Sheetal Dubey, learned Govt Adv for respondent no.4, on advance copy.

Heard on the question of admission.

The petitioneRs.defendants have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 13.8.2012 (Ann.

P-1) passed by the Civil Judge, Class- I, Panna in C.S.No.124-A/96 dismissing their application filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of the CPC for appointment of Commissioner to carry out the measurement of the disputed boundaries.

Initially after taking me through the papers placed on record, petitioner's counsel has argued the case at length for admission and allowing this petition.

On asking the petitioner's counsel how the petitioner could be permitted to use the process of the Court as an agency for collecting the evidence for him by allowing the impugned application, on which petitioner's counsel instead to argue further seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to raise all the objections and grounds stated in the petition subject to final judgment and decree of the trial court on arising the occasion in duly constituted appeal with further prayer of appropriate direction to the trial court that after recording the evidence of both the parties, if such court finds any ambiguity in the evidence, which it could not be solved without calling the Commissioner report of the disputed boundaries, then the court may call such report.

Considering the aforesaid prayer, the petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to raise the objections and the grounds stated in the petition subject to final judgment of the trial court on arising the occasion in duly constituted appeal.

Simultaneously the trial court is extended a liberty to call the Commissioner report under its discretion if after recording the evidence of the parties such court finds any ambiguity in the evidence, which could not be solved without calling the Commissioner report.

It is made clear that such direction to the trial court does not mean that any right to the party is given to file an application for calling the Commissioner report.

The petition is dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with aforesaid observation, liberty and direction.

C c as per rules.

( U.C.Maheshwari ) Judge bks

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Madan Lal vs Narayan Singh Same Subject Education