PREM CHAND Vs. RAM PHAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff- petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 3.12.2001 dismissing his application for a direction to the Kannongo to prepare the intkhab of the land in dispute.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Intkhab is required at the stage of production of evidence in order to enable the plaintiff- petitioner to establish that the property in dispute is ancestral as mutation Nos. 2758 and 2759 have been challenged by the plaintiffpetitioner. The application has been dismissed on the ground that the courts cannot be used as a medium to collect evidence for the parties.

(3.) Counsel has further contended that as per Chapter 9 Volume-I Rules V & VI of the High Court Rules and Orders, the Special Kanoongo appearing in evidence is required to bring with him the original record from which the excerpts are produced.