Hem Singh vs Ram Singh And Others on 30 June, 2016

[Cites 2, Cited by 8]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Hem Singh vs Ram Singh And Others on 30 June, 2016

Bench: Sanjay Karol

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                    SHIMLA.




                                                                      .
                                                 CMPMO No.151/2016





                                                 Decided on : 30.06.2016
    Hem Singh
                                                                  ...Petitioner





                                   Versus
    Ram Singh and others
                                                                  ....Respondents




                                              of
    Coram:
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?    1




    For the Petitioner         :    Mr. Leena Guleria, Advocate.
                     rt
    For the Respondents :           Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate.

    Sanjay Karol, J. (oral)

In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner assails order dated 5.4.2016, passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi, H.P., in Civil Suit No.02/2010, titled as Hem Singh vs. Ram Singh, whereby his application for appointment of Local Commissioner stands rejected.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as also perused the record, I am of the considered view that no case for interference whatsoever is made out by the present petitioner. It cannot be said that the impugned order is perverse, erroneous or illegal. The present petitioner claims Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:43:54 :::HCHP 2

possession on part of the suit property on the basis of oral agreement to sell, which fact stands vehemently denied by .

the respondents herein. Whether the petitioner is in possession of any portion of the suit property or not, such fact upon assertion is required to be proved in accordance with law and as such the Court below rightly held that in the of absence of any proof of title, no Local Commissioner can be appointed to collect evidence on behalf of the petitioner. As rt such, present petition, devoid of merit, is dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.




                                                    (Sanjay Karol),
    June 30, 2016 (KS)                                   Judge.







                                       ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:43:54 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court