BISWAMOHAN MISHRA Vs. RADHARANI MISHRA & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforementioned two writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in C.S. No. 18 of 2009 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ist Court, Cuttack, challenging the order dated 22.3.2012 by which the learned trial court rejected the two applications filed by the petitioner; one being to recall the order dated 5.1.2010 and the other, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to allow him to adduce evidence on all the issues. To appreciate the rival contentions, the facts leading to the above writ petitions are required to be exposited, which are as follows:

(2.) THE learned trial court on the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues:

(3.) IT may be mentioned that the plaintiff - petitioner has filed an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. and in the said application, the defendant also filed an application under Order 39, Rule 7 C.P.C. for inspection of the suit land. The learned court below allowed the application under Order 39, Rule 7 C.P.C. filed by the defendant and directed the defendant to take steps. At this juncture, when the defendant has not taken any step, the petitioner filed an application under Order 26, Rule 9 C.P.C. to depute a survey knowing Commissioner to ascertain the existence of the boundary wall.