Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.28 seconds)
Sant Ram And Anr vs Nikra Ram on 1 August, 2016 cites

Ram Dihal Lal And Anr. vs Lakhpat Lal And Ors. on 27 November, 1931

dispute, it was not possible to give any finding on the question of title or ownership of the disputed land and, therefore, the suit was remanded to the trial court with a direction that the trial court should issue a fresh survey commission for the demarcation of the disputed land and for ascertaining the number of the plot in which ,it of fell. In my view, for that limited purpose, it was not necessary to remand the entire suit under Order 41, Rule 23, Civil Procedure Code. The said purpose could be well achieved by the issuance rt of such a commission by the lower appellate court itself. I do not agree with Sri Chaudhary that the issuance of such a commission can only be done by way of the reception of additional evidence under Order 41, Rule 27, Civil Procedure Code. In my view that provision will not be applicable to a case where the Court itself desires a local inspection of the spot to be made and in such a situation the court can act under Order 26, Rule 9, Civil Procedure Code. It cannot be denied that an appellate Court has the power to issue a commission for local inspection in the same manner in which a trial court can act under Order 26, Rule 9, Civil Procedure Code. This follows from Section 107, Civil Procedure Code and if any authority be needed, then a reference can be made to Ram Dihal Lal v. Lakhpal Lal, (AIR 1932 All 270).
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1