JAI NARAIN Vs. TEJ RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under section 115 of the code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order of the trial Court dismissing the application of the plaintiff- petitioner for the appointment of a local commissioner. Learned counsel for the defendant-respondents has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this petition. Reliance Harvinder Kaur and another v. Godha Ram and another, 1979 AIR(P&H) 76 laying down that such an order cannot be said to be a case decided, hence not reviseable. Learned counsel for the petitioner then referred to the following observation of my Lords in para 13 of the reports :

(2.) As a last resort, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Pohlu Ram v. Gram Panchayat Dharamgarh, etc., 1980 PunLJ 24, a decision by S. P. Goyal, J. wherein the learned Judge interfered with the order of the trial Court refusing to appoint a local commissioner. In that case, the dispute between the parties was over an encroachment on the circular road of the village. The learned Judge expressed the view that the matter could be decided by making measurements at the spot. As such, it was necessary to appoint a local commissioner. It deserves mention here that the above-cited Division Bench ruling was not brought to the notice of S.P. Goyal, J. Being bound by the same, 1 find it exceedingly difficult to follow Pohlu Ram's case .

(3.) For the foregoing reasons, I accept the preliminary objection and dismiss the revision petition. No order as to costs.