PETITIONER:
SHRI JAI KISHAN
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SHRI KESHAV RAM & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/12/1996
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
ORDER
It is stated in the judgment of the learned single Judge of the High Court at page 4 and 5 thus:
"When the matter was argued before
me, I was of the opinion that the
measurements had not been taken by
the Tehsildar and the Revenue
Patwari in accordance with the well
set rules of procedure in this
behalf. Consequently, with the
consent of the parties, I passed an
order appointing another Local
Commissioner i.e. Tehsildar Kasauli
and issued certain directions to
him to go to the spot and measure
the site in dispute and to submit a
report in detail. This order was
passed on 20th May, 1996 and this
judgement be read in continuation
of that order, it may also be
noticed at this stage that the
parties before me had undertaken
that they will abide by the report
to be submitted by the Local
Commissioner and no objections
would be filed before this Court
against that. The report of the
Local Commissioner has been
received by this court in sealed
cover which was ordered to be
opened in the presence of the
learned counsel appearing for the
parties. This report is hereby
marked as Ex.C-1 and it shall from
part of the record."
On perusal of the report, the High Court has stated thus:
"It is also there in the report
that the appellant-defendant was
unable to substantiate his claim
that there was old existing
building on the disputed site which
he alleges to have purchased
through the registered sale deed.
On measurements, it has been found
that the defendant has encroached
upon an area belonging to the
plaintiff to the extent of 0-4
Biswas. The report is further
accompanied by the plan which was
prepared by the Local Commissioner
and the encroachments stands
indicated therein. The statements
of the parties were also recorded
by the Local Commissioner and are
attached to the report along with
the field book."
On the basis of the above factual matrix, the High Court has found that the view taken by the appellate Court was not vitiated by any illegality since that finding was substantiated by the report, Ex.C-1 given by the Commissioner appointed by the High Court. This being the factual position, we do not propose to go into the matter.
The special leave petition is dismissed.