SUBHASH PRASAD Vs. IFTEKHAR AHMAD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside part of the order dtd. 27/10/2018 passed by the learned Sub-Judge, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran in Title Suit No. 85 of 2016 by which the petition dtd. 26/10/2018 filed by him under Order 26, Rule 10-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "CPC") has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the court below while passing the impugned order has completely ignored the principles of law and justice. If the order is allowed to continue, the same would result in miscarriage of justice. He contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case scientific investigation by the survey knowing pleader commissioner for the suit land is a must.

(3.) The petitioner had filed Title Suit No. 85 of 2016 before the court of Sub-Judge, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran for declaration of his right, title and possession over the suit land mentioned in schedule 1 of the plaint. In the said proceeding, the petitioner filed two petitions, one under Order 1, Rule 10 of the CPC to add respondent nos. 5 to 7 as party to the suit and another under Order 6, Rule 17 of the CPC to amend the plaint under the changed circumstances. He had filed another petition on 26/10/2018 under Order 26, Rule 10-A of the CPC for scientific investigation by the survey knowing pleader commissioner for the suit land. On 21/12/2016, the respondents 1st set appeared in the suit and filed their written statement and denied the averments of the plaintiff. They also claimed their title over the suit land and others on the basis of registered sale deed dtd. 16/6/1955 said to have been executed by one Durga Prasad in favour of Md. Mustafa on 16/6/1955 with respect to 5 katha 1 dhur of land. On 27/10/2018, the respondents 1st set and 2nd set filed their rejoinders against the petition filed by the petitioner under Order 26, Rule 10- A of the CPC.