GHANSYAM Vs. SATISH KUMAR GUPTAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HE is heard on admission. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 18.7.2012 whereby his application filed under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. (Annexure P -3) is rejected. Admittedly, the present petitioner is defendant No. 4 before the Court below.

(2.) The defendant No.4 has not chosen to file any written statement in the said suit. By filing said application, it is prayed that a Commissioner be appointed to examine whether there exists a vacant plot or constructed house in the southern portion of Survey No. 565. The plaintiff took an objection on it and stated that the defendant has not filed any written statement. It is stated in the reply that the present petition is seeking appointment of Commissioner for a land which has nothing to do with the sale deed but the land is totally different.

(3.) THE petitioner has relied on, 2000 LAWS (SC) 3 87 (Shreepat Vs. Rajendra Prasad) and : 2010 (3) MPLJ 345 (Mathura Prasad Yadav vs. Sate of M.P.). Lastly, he relied on : 2011 (2) MPLJ 576 (Yaswant -S/o Kashiram Vs. Deendayal).