THAKUR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. PURAN SUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff's suit for injunction, vis-à-vis, the suit property stood dismissed. The aggrieved plaintiff, hence preferred a first appeal, before the learned District Judge, Kinnaur, Rampur at Bushahr, and, also the defendants, being aggrieved from certain adversarial findings recorded, upon, certain issues, hence preferred cross-objection, before the learned first appellate Court. The cross-objections, preferred by the defendants, before the learned first appellate Court, were dismissed, and, the learned first appeallate Court, rather allowed the first appeal, preferred therebefore, by the aggrieved plaintiff. The reasons ascribed by the learned first appellate Court, are anchored, upon, the controversy(s), (i) besetting the litigating parties, hence being amenable, for being put to quietus, only through appointment of a Local Commissioner, (ii) whereafter, for facilitating the aforesaid resting, of, the apt controversy(s), engaging the parties at contest, an order of remand, was, made by the learned first appellate Court, to, the learned trial Court.

(2.) The afore occurring observation(s), in, the verdict, pronounced by the learned first appellate Court, appertaining to the necessity, of, appointment, of, a Local Commissioner, appears to be just, given its facilitating, the, resting of controversy(s), engaging the parties at contest, (i) moreso, when the learned trial Judge, had tenably discarded the report of the Local Commissioner, as stood purveyed to him, (ii) reiteratedly, also since the dispute with respect, to, encroachments, purportedly made, upon, the respective contiguous estate(s), of, the contesting parties, is, amenable for its apt resting , only upon, valid demarcation, of the contigous estate, of, the litigating parties, hence being conducted by the Local Commissioner, thereupon also the afore occurring observations, in the impugned verdict, are tenable and just.

(3.) Be that as it may, the afore occurring necessity, for appointment, of, a Local Commissioner, though, appears to be just, and, in accordance with law, nor it suffers with any stain, of, illegality or gross impropriety. However, the appointment, of, a Local Commissioner, as directed, by the learned first appellate Court, to be made by the learned trial Judge, upon, the latter receiving the lis, upon its remand, qua it, besides also the report, as tendered by him, hence would also enable recording, of, clinching findings, only, vis-visissues No. 1 and 2, issues No. 1 and 2, whereof stand extracted hereinafter: