Gopal Krishan v. Satish Kumar And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2635 of 2013 Date of Decision.27.03.2015 Gopal Krishan .......Petitioner

Versus

Satish Kumar and others ......Respondents

Present:

Mr. Nitin Goyal, Advocate for Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. R.S. Malik, Advocate for respondent No.1.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J. (ORAL) 1.

The revision petition is against the order of appointment of local commissioner made under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC. The counsel for the petitioner says that the local commissioner, who is a Tehsildar, has actually inspected the property and has also filed a report. He has also been cited as witness for examination. At this stage, the question of considering a challenge to the appointment cannot be considered. The counsel for the petitioner states that the local commissioner could not have been appointed. The petitioner may use such objection at the time when a reliance is sought to be made on the commissioner's report at the time of arguments.

2.

With these observations, the revision petition is disposed of. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 27, 2015 Pankaj* PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.03.31 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document