CHANNO Vs. RIKHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the above-noted petitions shall be disposed of by this single order as the impugned orders have been passed in the suits for partition filed by the same plaintiffs.

(2.) ON an application filed by the defendant to permit him to construct/repair the property in dispute, the learned trial Court had appointed Shri Manjit Singh, S.D.O. as Local Commissioner with the direction to report about the existing condition of the building. The Local Commissioner submitted his report on 17.7.1999. It is reported that the property in dispute needs immediate repairs. Immediately the trial Court passed the order dated 17.7.1999 which reads as under:

(3.) THE revision as it is against the issue of Commission may not be maintainable because the order directing issuance of Commissioner is only interlocutory in nature. The Commissioner's report is subject to all checks and any item or evidence contained in the report is also subject to all checks in law. The question whether an order declining to set aside a Commissioner's report is revisable, came up for consideration before a Division Bench of Kerala High Court in Kanaram Nair v. Madhavan Nair, 1996(1) KLT 162 which is also referred in Venkataram Naidu v. Vasanthi, 2000(1) RCR(Civil) 576. The revision was found to be not maintainable. However, in the cases in hand the rights of the petitioner are substantially affected by straightaway accepting the report of the Local Commissioner as it simultaneously permitted the defendant to carry out necessary repairs and then again permitted him to reconstruct the building.