RAMADHAR PATHAK Vs. LAL BABU PATHAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code') has been preferred by the defendant -petitioner against the impugned order, whereby the learned Sub -ordinate Judge confirmed the Commissioner's report under Order XXVI Rule 14(3) of the Code.

(2.) ON the objection raised by the Stamp Reporter regarding maintainability of this civil revision, a learned Single Judge after hearing both the parties and having differed with a decision of another Single Judge of this Court in the case of Uma Kant Jha & other vs. Shital Takur & other, 1995(1) PLJR 670, referred this matter to a Division Bench.

(3.) IT would appear from the impugned order that after the preliminary decree in the partition suit, a survey knowing Pleader Commissioner was appointed for carving out separate Takhta to the extent of the shares allotted to the parties in the decree. The Commissioner after observing all the formalities submitted his report on 6.4.1993 along with map and other relevant papers. Parties were heard on the objection filed by defendant nos. 2 and 3 and ultimately by the impugned order, the court below rejected the objection of the defendants and confirmed the report, fixing the case for 19.11.1996 for further steps.