CHANCHAL DEVI VERMA Vs. ASHWANI BANCHOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the learned Fourth Civil Judge (Junior Division), Raipur (C.G.) dtd. 15/1/2025 whereby application moved by the petitioners/ plaintiffs U/o 26 Rule 9 of CPC has been rejected.

(2.) Facts of the present case are that plaintiffs filed suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction pertaining to part of Khasra No. 654/27 ad-measuring 4,900 sq. ft situated at Raipura, P.H. No. 104, Revenue Circle Raipur-I (C.G.) inter-alia on the ground that the suit property was purchased through registered sale-deed in the year 1991. It is pleaded that the defendant No. 2 has encroached over part of the suit property, therefore, an application for demarcation was moved before the Tehsildar, Raipur in the year 2011 and demarcation was also conducted in the year 2015 but that order was quashed by the District Collector, Raipur and matter was remitted back to Tehsildar but till date, application has not been decided. The plaintiffs moved an application before the trial Court for appointment of Commissioner to resolve the dispute with regard to identity of land/ encroachment over the suit property but that application has been rejected on the ground that plaintiffs are trying to collect evidence through the Court concerned.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners/ plaintiffs submits that there is dispute with regard to identity of land as defendant No. 2 has started raising construction over part of the suit property, therefore, application U/o 26 Rule 9 of CPC was moved. He contends that the learned trial Court rejected the application without assigning sufficient reason. He fairly admits that application for demarcation is pending consideration before Tehsildar, Raipur as matter was remitted back by the District Collector, Raipur to the authority concerned.