KALYAN SINGH Vs. RASIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, lays challenge to an order dtd. 21/11/2020 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Nadaun, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, whereby an application under Order VII, rule 14 CPC, having been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff (hereinafter, 'plaintiff') seeking therein permission to place on record enquiry report submitted by one Kuldeep Singh, Head Constable No. 54, Police Station Nadaun, dtd. 12/1/2015, came to be dismissed.

(2.) Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the plaintiff filed a suit against the respondent-defendant (hereinafter, 'defendanf) for mandatory injunction, directing defendant and or his assignees not to block the only path leading to the house of the plaintiff, learned Court below, after completion of pleadings, framed issues on 24/4/2018, whereafter, an application under Order VII, rule 14 CPC, came to be filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking therein permission to place on record enquiry report, as detailed herein above. With the help and aid of the aforesaid report, plaintiff wants to prove that in the year 2015, defendant had blocked the passage leading to his house and same was subsequently opened with the intervention of the Police. Since learned Court below refused to take aforesaid document on record, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set aside aforesaid impugned order dtd. 21/11/2020.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record vis-a-vis reasoning assigned by learned Court below, while passing impugned order dtd. 21/11/2020, this court finds no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, as such, no interference is called for. Careful perusal of the enquiry report intended to be brought on record, reveals that in the year 2015, some passage allegedly blocked by the defendant was got opened by the police. Since defendant again blocked path, plaintiff was compelled to file the suit as referred to above seeking therein direction to the defendant not to block the only passage leading to the house of the plaintiff. Since there is no specific reference with regard to the land, over which defendant had caused obstruction, learned Court below, while dismissing the application filed under Order VII, rule 14 CPC, rightly observed that the report intended to be placed on record, cannot be said to have any kind of relationship with the suit property, especially when there is no mention, if any, of suit property. Though, having perused aforesaid enquiry report, this court finds that prior to filing of suit, there was some dispute inter se parties on account of obstruction caused to the path leading to the house of the plaintiff, but since the report does not contain specific details with regard to property, it is difficult to relate enquiry report with suit property.