SHRI JAGAT RAM Vs. SHRI BALIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned trial Court on an application under Order 21 Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure rejecting two demarcation reports produced on the record. The Court observed that as the Decree Holder is not responsible for the lacuna in the demarcation report, he should not suffer any damage and if there is any violation of the judgment and decree of the Court, that needs to be enforced and the Judgment Debtor punished. The Court then proceeds that the factum of encroachment cannot be ascertained by oral evidence. The Court therefore appointed an expert for demarcation of the spot. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner urges that it is not open to the Court to reject these reports at the interim stage without any settled issue and the same should have been determined at the time of final hearing of the suit.

(2.) THE Supreme Court in Haryana Waqf Board vs. Shanti Sarup and others, : (2008) 8 SCC 671 and in Bali Ram vs. Mela Ram and another, : AIR 2003 HP 87 this Court have laid down the principles applicable for invoking the provisions of Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In these circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to consider the demarcation reports in consonance with two judgments cited supra. Petition stands disposed of.