ANANDILAL Vs. ISHWAR LAL & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-plaintiff is aggrieved by the order dated 4.4.2014 passed by the Civil Judge (JD) & Judicial Magistrate, Dudu, District Jaipur whereby the learned Magistrate has dismissed the petitioner's application under Order 7, Rule 14(3) CPC and has declined his prayer to take the Commissioner's report on record.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-plaintiff, Anandilal, filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the respondents-defendants. Alongwith the suit, the petitioner has also filed a temporary injunction application. While considering the temporary injunction application, the learned trial court had appointed a Commissioner to inspect the property in dispute. After inspection, the Commissioner had submitted his report in the T.I. application. Subsequently, after completion of pleadings and evidence of both the parties, the matter was listed for final arguments. On the date when the matter was listed for final arguments, the petitioner moved an application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC for taking the Commissioner's report, filed in the T.I. application, on record in the main suit. However, by order dated 4.4.2014, the learned Magistrate has rejected the application. Hence, this petition before this court.

(3.) Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that since the Commissioner's report was available in the temporary injunction application, the same should have been taken on record by the learned Magistrate while deciding the issues. However, without assigning any valid reason, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the application.