The Improvement Trust Karnal Vs. Kalyan Singh and Others - Court Judgment

-1- Civil Revision No.1753 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1753 of 2007 Date of decision: 20.09.2013 The Improvement Trust, Karnal ....Petitioner Versus Kalyan Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not ?.

3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?.

Present: - Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the respondents.

***** PARAMJEET SINGH, J.

(ORAL) Instant revision petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 30.1.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division).Karnal, whereby the application under Order 18 Rule 19 read with Section 151 CPC filed by defendant/petitioner, has been dismissed.

Bare perusal of Order 18 Rule 19 CPC makes it clear that it is with regard to examination of the witness on commission, residing within local jurisdiction of the concerned court for the just and expeditious disposal of a suit.

It is not mentioned in the application as to which witness the defendant/petitioner wants to examine on commission.

Singh Ravinder 2013.09.25 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh -2- Civil Revision No.1753 of 2007 Learned trial court has recorded the following finding: - “4.

Arguments heard and record was perused.

The present application has been moved u/o 18 rule 19 of CPC.

It is envisaged in the said provision that “Power to get statements recorded on commission – Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the court may, instead of examining witnesses in open court, direct their statements to be recorded on commission under rule 4-A of Order XXVI.”

.

The Rule 4-A of Order xxvi may be reproduced as under: - “4-A – Commission for examination of any person resident within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court.

- Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, any Court may, in the interest of justice or for the expeditious disposal of the case or for any other reason, issue commission in any suit for the examination, on interrogatories or otherwise, of any person resident within the local limits of its jurisdiction, and the evidence so recorded shall be read in evidence.”

.

5.

A bare perusal of these inter-related provisions of CPC, it is made out that the court has power to issue commission for the examination of a person, residing within its local jurisdiction for the just and expeditious disposal of a suit.

However, in the present case, the defendant-applicant want to utilize these provisions for the local inspection of the suit land.

The provisions are not in conformity with the averments and the prayer made in the present application.

As such the application is not maintainable in the eyes of law.

Even otherwise there is a regular and consistent revenue record pertaining to the suit land.

The defendant-applicant is Singh Ravinder 2013.09.25 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh -3- Civil Revision No.1753 of 2007 assailing the same to be forged and fabricated.

But the applicant has failed to produce any document to show as to from what time the record turned fabricated and as to what steps were taken by the applicant for challenging and correcting the same.

In view of these facts and circumstances, the application of the defendant/applicant is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed hereby.”

.

In view of above, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

Dismissed.

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge September 20, 2013 R.S.Singh Ravinder 2013.09.25 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh