SANTOSH DHURI Vs. SANJAY AWASTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff's suit for permanent/mandatory injunction for demolition of boundary wall and further that the defendants be restrained from interfering the suit land came to be dismissed by the trial Court with a finding that the plaintiff has failed to prove that the defendants have encroached upon their suit land bearing Khasra No.443, Area .75 acre. It has also been held that the plaintiff has submitted the inspection report demarcated by the Revenue Inspector (Ex. P-2) but it was not duly proved to be prepared by the Revenue Officer within the meaning of Sec. 129 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 and the Revenue Officer was also not examined to prove the said report. S.A. No. 184 of 2014

(2.) On appeal being preferred, the first Appellate Court concurred with the finding of the trial Court and dismissed the first appeal and the appellant/plaintiff preferred second appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'CPC').

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the application under Order 26 Rule 9 was wrongly rejected by the trial Court by order dtd. 6/5/2008 and the first Appellate Court has also not considered the said ground in its proper perspective.