Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.24 seconds)

Bali Ram vs Mela Ram And Anr. on 28 August, 2002

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in support of his contention for the appointment of Commissioner relies on the decision reported in Bali Ram, Appellant v. Mela Ram an another, respondents, AIR 2003 Himachal Pradesh 87 wherein, it is inter alia observed that 'To issue a Commission under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the court, it is not necessary that either or both the parties must apply for issue of commission, the court can issue local commission suo moto, if in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed necessary that local investigation is required and it is proper for the purpose of eliciting any matter in dispute. Though exercise of these powers is discretionary with the court, but in case to make a local investigation is requisite and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, it should be exercised so that a final and just decision is rendered in the case.'
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 29 - M R Verma - Full Document

Kantaru Sahu And Ors. vs Dharma Sahu And Anr. on 19 July, 1983

6. Yet another decision reported in Kantaru Sahu and others, Appellants v. Dharma Sahu and another, Respondents AIR 1983 Orissa 259 has been relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein it is held that 'in view of the said infirmities, the concurrent findings of the trial court and the trial could not be sustained. The case was remanded to the trial court for conducting a fresh investigation by the commissioner for local investigation.'
Orissa High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1