ANIL KUMAR Vs. PRAKASH VIZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior-Division), Court No.3, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in C.M.A. No. 9003752/2018, dated 18.3.2019, vide which an application filed by the present petitioner under Order 26, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, for appointing a Local Commissioner to demarcate the suit land to ascertain as to whether the suit land stands encroached upon by the defendants or not, stands rejected by the learned Court below.

(2.) Record demonstrates that the petitioner herein has filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, praying therein that the defendants be restrained from interfering with the suit land and that a decree of mandatory injunction be passed, directing the defendants to remove the encroachment made by the defendants upon the suit land.

(3.) It is borne out from the record that application under Order 26, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code was filed by the present petitioner for demarcation of the suit land as far back as in the month of October, 2015, i.e. the stage when the plaintif had not even led their evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application was kept pending by the learned trial Court by observing that the prayer made in the same shall be considered at an appropriate stage as the same at that stage was premature.