MURLIDHAR Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri I.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Undisputed facts giving rise to the dispute are as under.

(3.) Plaintiff-petitioners filed suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the defendant-respondents from interfering in their possession over the suit property and not to dispossess them by force or to change its nature. An Amin Commissioner was appointed by the trial Court to make inspection of the property, who submitted a report that it was the plaintiff-petitioners who were in cultivatory possession of the suit property and paddy crops were standing on the land in dispute. The report was confirmed by the trial Court subject to evidence vide order dated 20.9.2006. Four witnesses were examined on behalf of plaintiff- petitioners. At the stage of evidence of the defendants, after cross-examination of D.W. 1, who stated that land in dispute is in the nature of 'talab' and there are no crops standing, an application was filed by the plaintiff-petitioners under Order XVIII Rule 18 C.P.C. with a prayer that Court may make spot inspection so that the evidence being recorded in the case may be properly appreciated. Trial Court vide order dated 26.4.2010 dismissed the application against which the plaintiff- petitioners filed a revision which has also been dismissed.