Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Surajmal vs Union Of India And Ors on 29 January, 2018

 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
                      JAIPUR
               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 698 / 2018
Surajmal S/o Shri Durjan Ram, by Caste Yadav, R/o Ghodafer Ka
Chauraha, Near Bareth Hostel, Alwar (Raj.)
                                                         ----Petitioner
                               Versus
1. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Central
Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi

2. Brigadier, Jai Paltan, 57 Regiment, Alwar (Raj.)

3. State of Rajasthan Through District Collector, Alwar (Raj.) Land
Holder
                                                    ----Respondents

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Sharma.

For Respondent(s) :

_____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 29/01/2018 (1) The writ petition is directed against the order dated 16.11.2017 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Alwar (Rajasthan) (hereinafter to be referred as the 'appellate Court') whereby the appellate Court has rejected the application for appointing Commissioner at the appellate stage.

(2) Learned Counsel submits that the statements which were recorded before the Court of Civil Judge (JD) & Judicial Magistrate No.1, Alwar (hereinafter to be referred as the 'trial Court') mentioned about the measurements of the land. However, for correct disposal, he moved an application at the appellate stage for appointing Commissioner for submitting report relating (2 of 2) [CW-698/2018] to the position of the land in dispute. By another order of the same date, i.e. 16.11.2017, the appellate Court has granted an interim stay protecting the rights of the petitioner. So far as the present application is concerned, taking into consideration that the statements have already been recorded and the suit has already been decided finally, the appellate Court has rejected the application for appointing the Commissioner at this stage. (3) This Court does not find any illegality committed by the appellate Court so as to interfere by invoking powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of the India. Taking into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the Case of Rajkumar Bhatiya Vs. Subhash Chander Bhatiya ; 2017(14) Scale 355 wherein the scope of interference under Article 227 has been highlighted relying on the earlier judgment of Apex Court in Sadhana Lodh Vs. National Insurance Company; AIR 2003 SC 1561 and holding that the High Court does not act as an appellate Court and it is not open to it to review or re-assess the evidence upon which the inferior Court or Tribunal has passed an order, no interference is called for in the present case. (4) The present writ petition is misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J. N.Gandhi/52