TEJBIR Vs. DEEP CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioners challenge the order passed by the learned trial Court [Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sonipat], dated 23.05.2017, by which his application seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner, to determine the "existing position of the street existing between the houses of the parties to the suit."

(2.) Though learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as already noticed above, that he has been using the passage for 60 years and other than by appointment of a Local Commissioner there is no method of determining whether there is an existent passage or not, and to fortify his submission he also wishes to rely upon certain judgments, in the opinion of this Court, this petition can be disposed of at this stage, with a direction to the trial Court that it would first determine on the basis of evidence led by the parties, as to whether there is any other alternative passage to the petitioners' property, and if no such passage is seen and there is no other method of determining as to whether a passage has actually been existent for a long time on the suit property, a Local Commissioner would be appointed by that Court, to determine the existence of the passage, as also possibly the time since it has been existent.

(3.) It is to be noticed that learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that a report of a revenue official ('Kanungo') already being on record, in any case, no other Local Commissioner needs to be appointed.