SAROJ DEVI GUPTA Vs. LAXAMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 assails the interlocutory order passed on 15.05.2013 in Civil Suit No. 3A/12 passed by District Judge, Morena by which an application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC preferred by the plaintiff/respondent herein for demarcation of the suit property as reflected in the plaint map, has been allowed. Learned counsel for rival parties are heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the trial Court failed to discover the real intent of collection of evidence behind the application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC. It is further contended that if at all demarcation was necessary then the entire property ought to have been demarcated instead of the part of the property.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that in case learned counsel for defendant/petitioner submits that entire property ought to have been demarcated then he has no right to object to the impugned order directing for demarcation of part of the property. It is further contended by respondent that since there was dispute regarding initiation of suit property, the Court below was well within its jurisdiction to direct for demarcation under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC.