SHANTI LAL Vs. JAGANNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners (plaintiffs) seek quashing of the impugned order dtd. 5/3/2025 (Annexure 5), vide which their application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC, seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner, was rejected.

(2.) Brief facts first. Petitioners (Plaintiffs) filed a suit for cancellation of the sale deed dtd. 19/7/2010, along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, seeking injunction against the respondents from disturbing possession of the suit property.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the trial Court erred in dismissing the application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC, as the appointment of a Commissioner was necessary to fairly ascertain the actual status and possession of the suit property, which is disputed by both parties.