RAM CHANDRA Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE GORAKHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application under Order XXVI. Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure was allowed in Original Suit No. 382 of 1985. The Court Amin was appointed for local inspection. He submitted his report which was accepted by an order dated 18th July, 1999 despite objection filed by the petitioners who were defendants in the suit. Civil Revision No. 190 of 1999 arising thereout was dismissed summarily by an order dated 27th August. 1999 passed by the learned District Judge. Gorakhpur. These orders have since been challenged in this writ petition.

(2.) Mr. Sheo Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners alleges that the Commissioner had prepared a different report which was filed in the Court and was accepted but the report which was prepared on the field book contains the signature of the parties as such the report could not have been accepted.

(3.) Mr. K. A. Qayyum, learned counsel for the opposite parties on the other hand contends that the acceptance of the report is not a case decided within the meaning of Section 115 of the Code and as such the revision was rightly rejected. According to him, even if the Commissioner's report is accepted, the same is subject to assessment and evaluation as a piece of evidence at the time of hearing on the basis of the material that might come before the Court. The Commissioner may also be examined and all these grounds which are being now taken may be put forth. Therefore, according to him, there is no infirmity in the orders Impugned.