YATISH CHANDRA MADHARIYA Vs. UMEDILABIC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered by this Court in this plaintiff's second appeal is as under:-

(2.) The imperative facts required for determination of above-stated substantial question of law are as under:-

(3.) Mr.Manoj Paranjape, learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff, would submit that the First Appellate Court is absolutely unjustified in dismissing the suit by rejecting the Commissioner's report ignoring the fact that objection against the Commissioner's report has already been rejected by the trial Court on 4.10.91 and revision against that order has already been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge on 30.1.97, as such, the defendants are precluded from raising plea based on Commissioner's report in view of the provisions contained in Section 105 (1) of the CPC, which has already been taken against the Commissioner's report and that has become final. Therefore, the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court deserves to be set aside by granting the appeal and answering the substantial question of law in favour of the plaintiff.