Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1135820/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11358 of 2008
=========================================================
MANKUVA
GURJAR VANIA MAHAJAN TRUST - THROUGH THEIR TRUSTEES & 2 -
Petitioner(s)
Versus
SONI
MAGANLAL MOHANLAL - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR.HIREN
M MODI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.
None for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 11/09/2008
ORAL
ORDER
The
petitioners original plaintiffs in the present petition has
challenged an order dated 25.4.2008 passed below exh.19 in Regular
Civil Suit NO. 135/2002. By the said order, learned Additional Civil
Judge, Bhuj rejected the application of the petitioners original
plaintiffs for appointment of Court Commissioner for drawing
Panchnama of the position prevailing in residential property being
house No. 6/118. Learned Judge while rejecting the application
observed that the application is apparently given for collecting
evidence which cannot be the ground for ordering appointment of
Court Commissioner. Learned Judge also observed that undisputably
the house property of which the report is sought, is not even the
suit property. It appears that the case of plaintiff before the
trial Court is that the defendant-tenant has acquired alternative
suitable accommodation wherein he is residing, to establish this,
Court Commission of another house, where according to the plaintiffs
defendant is presently residing, is requested.
In
view of the above factual parameters and the conclusion of the
learned Judge to which I am in agreement, I do not find this is a
case where Court commissioner could have been appointed.
I
find no merits in the petition. Same is therefore, dismissed.
It
is always open for the petitioner to produce evidence to establish
his case.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)
Top