HAR SINGH BISHT Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 8 -11 -2006 and 19 -3 -2007 passed by the District Judge, Almora, in Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2006, Har Singh v. Uttam Singh. By the order dated 8 -11 -2006, the learned District Judge Almora has rejected the application 24 -C moved by the Petitioner holding that the application for survey commission for making the survey of the spot has been moved just to cause delay. By the order dated 19 -3 -2007, the application filed by the Petitioner paper No. 30 -C has been rejected on the ground that the Appellant has not given any ground on which he intends to file the evidence and that the application does not fall within the purview of Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure

(2.) THE Petitioner moved application 24 -C for issue a survey commission for making survey of the spot. It was alleged in the application that the dispute is of public path way and the pathway is being used by all the residents of the village, while the Respondent No. 3 intends to grasp the entire public path way. Plaintiff -Respondent Uttam Singh filed objection and it was alleged therein that the question in dispute is whether the property in dispute is a Bhumidhari land or not. The burden lies upon the Appellant to prove it and it is to be decided on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by the parties.

(3.) THE Apex Court in the case of Shreepat v. Rajendra Prasad and Ors., 2000 (2) J.C.L.R. 462 (Sc) has held as under: