ZEENAT Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE RAE BARELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Dilip Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri S.A. Zamal, learned counsel for respondents.

(2.) FACTS of the present case are that petitioner-plaintiff initially filed a Suit (registered as Regular Suit No. 254 of 2006), dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 31.03.2010 passed by Civil Judge(J.D.), Raebareli.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for respondents while defending the order dated 02.11.2010 passed by respondent no. 1 by which the petitioner's application for issue of Commission has been rejected, submits that the order in question is perfectly valid, needs no interference by this Court while exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the said order is neither perverse in nature nor contrary to the facts on record, rather the respondent no. 1 after taking into consideration that there is sufficient evidence on record, so there is no need to issue Commission, sought by the petitioner only to collect additional evidence in her favour. The said ground does not falls within the ambit and scope of the provisions for issue of Commission under Order XXVI Rule 9 C.P.C., so the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.