High CourtsSingle Bench

Ishwar Chand vs Municipal Council Thanesar

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 12 July 2013 · Citation: (2013) 07 P&H CK 0441

HON’BLE JUDGES
Paramjeet Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Revision No. 4118 of 2013
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 225 words

Paramjeet Singh, J.—The instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the order dated 24.5.2013 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kurukshetra, whereby the application moved by the petitioner for appointment of Local Commissioner has been dismissed.

Heard.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the application for appointment of Local Commissioner has been wrongly dismissed by learned trial court. Local Commissioner was required to demarcate the land in question. Learned trial court has come to a conclusion that property has already been demarcated, therefore, question of getting re-demarcation of suit property by way of appointment of Local Commissioner is not justified.

3.

I have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

4.

The only ground of the petitioner is that during the cross-examination of DWs they have admitted that they have no objection to demarcation of the land in question. Merely on this ground Local Commissioner cannot be appointed.

5.

It is settled principle of law that Court cannot appoint Local Commissioner for creating evidence and to prove the ownership. Moreover, the land does not bear any khasra number within the redline, therefore, only possession is to be respected.

6.

I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Dismissed.