Trevedi Lal and others v. Municipal Council, Hoshiarpur Through its Execu
Case Details
RSA-4436-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-4436-2011 Reserved on 17.11.2025 Date of decision: 27.11.2025 Uploaded on : 27.11.2025 Trevedi Lal and others ...Appellants Versus Municipal Council, Hoshiarpur Through its Execu(cid:27)ve Officer ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Argued by: Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurmeet Singh Budhiraja, Advocate and Mr. Sangeet Pal Singh, Advocate for the respondent. DEEPAK GUPTA, J. **** This Regular Second Appeal has been preferred by the plain(cid:27)ff – Onkar Singh (now represented through his legal representa(cid:27)ves) against the concurrent findings of the Courts below. 2. Suit for permanent injunc(cid:27)on filed by the plain(cid:27)ff, seeking to restrain the defendant–Municipal Council [now Municipal Corpora(cid:15)on], Hoshiarpur from se3ng up any Rehri market or making any fixtures or con- struc(cid:27)ons over land measuring 12 kanals 17 marlas comprised in Khewat No.132, Khatouni No.147, bearing Khasra Nos. 46-R/2 (7-15), 3/1 (2-6), 8 (1- 3), 9/1 (1-13), as per Jamabandi for the year 1996-97, situated in revenue estate of village Naloian, H.B. No.225, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, was YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 1 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 dismissed by the trial Court on 08.12.2008, and the first appeal preferred by the plain(cid:27)ff also met the same fate on 09.06.2011. 3. For the sake of convenience, par(cid:27)es shall be referred to by their status before the trial Court. 4.1 Plain(cid:6)ff’s case : The case set up by the plain(cid:27)ff was that he is exclusive owner in possession of the land in dispute, situated near the bridge over Bhangi Choe, within the municipal limits of Hoshiarpur city. According to him, the land was lying vacant and in his possession. While
Legal Reasoning
which were taken on record and examined by this Court. Having perused the report, the site plan and the objec(cid:27)ons, this Court found no infirmity which would warrant discarding the demarca(cid:27)on, par(cid:27)cularly as it was car- ried out by a senior revenue official (Tehsildar) in the presence of the par(cid:27)es, on the basis of revenue record and in compliance with the earlier direc(cid:27)ons of this Court. 15. ThereaSer, this Court, vide order dated 17.12.2019, specifically no(cid:27)ced that as per the demarca(cid:27)on report and the site plan prepared by the Tehsildar, encroachment of 1 kanal 10 marlas of Sabzi Rehri Market had been found in Khasra No.46//3/1 and that encroachments and roads were also reflected in respect of Khasra Nos. 46//2, 8 and 9/1. Time was granted to counsel for the respondent to obtain instruc(cid:27)ons with regard to the roads shown in the site plan and notes. YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 7 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 16. In compliance, an affidavit dated 27.03.2025 was filed by Sandeep Kumar, Joint Commissioner, Municipal Corpora(cid:27)on, Hoshiarpur. In this affidavit, it has been categorically stated that the Municipal Corpora- (cid:27)on has no concern with: (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) the Rehri market as shown at Serial No.1 in the notes of the site plan; the mandir as shown at Serial No.4 in the notes of the site plan; and the roads as shown at Serial Nos.5, 6 and 8 in the notes of the site plan, as men(cid:27)oned in the Tehsildar’s report dated 08.02.2017, and that the said roads are constructed and maintained by the PWD Department. 17. The stand so taken in the affidavit is clearly at variance with the earlier pleadings of the defendant, wherein it had been asserted that the site in dispute vested in the Municipal Council, formed part of Town Planning Scheme No.7, that part of the site had been used as a chowk, where the Municipal Council charged Tehbazari from Rehri owners selling vegetables and fruits, and that during “Opera(cid:27)on Clean” it was the Muni- cipal Council, which had removed temporary structures raised by donkey owners at the site. 18. Based upon all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is argued by learned counsel for the appellant-plain(cid:27)ff that plain(cid:27)ff-appellant reserves his right to take appropriate legal ac(cid:27)ons against the encroachers of his property as shown at Sr. No. 2 to 8 of the demarca(cid:27)on report and the annexed site plan. However, as far as the Rehri market shown at Sr. No. 1 is concerned, it is the municipal corpora(cid:27)on-defendant, which has to take the responsibility to remove that encroachment and that necessary direc(cid:27)on is required to be given by this Court. 19. On the other hand, it is contended by learned counsel for the YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 8 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 respondent-defendant that respondent has no concern with any such Rehri market and therefore, it is for the plain(cid:27)ff to take appropriate ac(cid:27)on against the people, who have encroached any por(cid:27)on of the property and who park their Rehris etc. at the land. Learned counsel submits that defendant Corpora(cid:27)on cannot take any such responsibility to remove the Rehri market. 20. This Court has considered submissions of both the sides and have appraised the record carefully. Substan(cid:6)al ques(cid:6)ons of law : 21. In the above factual backdrop and in the light of the fresh court-directed demarca(cid:27)on report, the following substan(cid:27)al ques(cid:27)ons of law arise for considera(cid:27)on in this second appeal: (cid:1) Whether, in view of the demarca(cid:27)on conducted by the Tehsil- dar in compliance with the order of this Court, the concurrent findings of the Courts below regarding non-establishment of the iden(cid:27)ty of the suit property and absence of encroachment by the defendant can be sustained? (cid:1) Whether, in the face of the defendant’s own pleadings admit- (cid:27)ng its past use of the site as a chowk and charging Tehbazari from Rehri owners, the defendant–Municipal Corpora(cid:27)on can now legally shirk its responsibility to remove the encroach- ment in the form of a Rehri market found to be exis(cid:27)ng on the plain(cid:27)ff’s land? 22. Both these ques(cid:27)ons go to the root of the dispute and arise squarely from the record as now clarified by the Court-directed demarca- (cid:27)on. They, therefore, fall within the ambit of Sec(cid:27)on 100 CPC and warrant YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 9 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 interference with the concurrent findings, which stood rendered on a ma- terially incomplete and uncertain factual founda(cid:27)on. Discussion and legal reasoning : 23. The Courts below declined relief essen(cid:27)ally on the ground that the plain(cid:27)ff had failed to establish that the site, where the Rehri market stood was the same as the land owned by him as per the jamabandi entries. It is true that jamabandi entries, by themselves, may not conclusively estab- lish the precise iden(cid:27)ty and loca(cid:27)on of land on the spot, especially when the land is described as “gair mumkin Choe” and there is surrounding urban development. Hence, proper demarca(cid:27)on, based on revenue map and measurements, becomes crucial. 24. It is precisely to cure this deficiency that this Court directed de- marca(cid:27)on through the Tehsildar in the presence of both par(cid:27)es. The de- marca(cid:27)on report now clearly and categorically maps the physical site to Khasra Nos. 46//2, 46//3/1, 46//8 and 46//9/1 and specifies that in Khasra No.46//3/1, an area of about 1 kanal 10 marlas is occupied by the Sabzi Rehri Market. This directly connects the site of encroachment with the khasra numbers men(cid:27)oned in the head-note of the plaint and in the jamabandi in the plain(cid:27)ff’s favour. 25. Once such demarca(cid:27)on, carried out by a competent revenue authority in the presence of the par(cid:27)es, is accepted by the Court aSer con- sidering and rejec(cid:27)ng the objec(cid:27)ons of the defendant, the earlier view that the iden(cid:27)ty of the property was not established, cannot be sustained. The founda(cid:27)on of the concurrent findings thus stands displaced. The plain(cid:27)ff’s (cid:27)tle to these khasra numbers was never seriously disputed; rather, even the trial Court proceeded on the foo(cid:27)ng that he was owner of the land as per jamabandi. The only doubt was with respect to the physical correla(cid:27)on YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 10 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 between his khasra numbers and the actual site of the Rehri market, a doubt which now stands resolved in his favour. 26. In such circumstances, to deny relief despite a clear demarca- (cid:27)on would amount to permi3ng encroachers to con(cid:27)nue on private prop- erty merely because, at an earlier stage of li(cid:27)ga(cid:27)on, the iden(cid:27)ty was not sa(cid:27)sfactorily established. This Court, vested with the power to correct sub- stan(cid:27)al errors of law arising from misapprecia(cid:27)on of material evidence, cannot countenance such a result. 27. The second limb of the reasoning of the Courts below was that no encroachment by the Municipal Council was proved, as (a) the Local Commissioner’s report did not expressly name the Municipal Council as an encroacher, and (b) no Tehbazari record was produced to show that the Rehris were sta(cid:27)oned there under the authority of the Municipal Council. 28. Two aspects are now material: (cid:1) First, the demarca(cid:27)on report of the Tehsildar has confirmed that there is a Sabzi Rehri Market occupying 1 kanal 10 marlas in Khasra No.46//3/1, which forms part of the plain(cid:27)ff’s land. (cid:1) Second, in the wriIen statement, the defendant itself pleaded that some part of the site was earlier used as a chowk and that the Muni- cipal Council used to charge Tehbazari from the Rehri owners, who stood there for selling vegetables, fruits etc., and that during “Opera- (cid:27)on Clean” it was the Municipal Council, which removed temporary structures of donkey owners. 29. An admission in pleadings is the best form of evidence and re- quires no further proof. The defendant cannot, at a later stage, resile from or dilute its clear admission that it was exercising control over the site by levying Tehbazari and by regula(cid:27)ng the presence of Rehris and other tem- YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 11 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 porary structures. The subsequent plea, through an affidavit, that the Muni- cipal Corpora(cid:27)on has “no concern” with the Rehri market, cannot efface the earlier stand nor can it be permiIed to be used as a device to shirk re- sponsibility. 30. Even otherwise, as a maIer of public law, a municipal body is under a statutory duty to regulate and, where necessary, remove unauthor- ized encroachments upon public streets, public places or private land, where encroachments disturb public order or impede lawful use. Where the encroachment has grown with its tacit permission and under its regu- latory regime, such as Tehbazari, the municipal body cannot wash its hands off the situa(cid:27)on and compel a private land-owner to individually li(cid:27)gate against each small encroacher, par(cid:27)cularly when their presence has been facilitated by municipal ac(cid:27)ons or omissions. 31. In the present case, the plain(cid:27)ff’s grievance in the suit was not that each Rehri owner be personally evicted by passing a decree against him, but that the Municipal Council be restrained from plan(cid:27)ng, permi3ng or regularizing a Rehri market on his land. In substance, the relief claimed is one of prohibitory and mandatory injunc(cid:27)on against the municipal body, to prevent it from using or permi3ng use of the plain(cid:27)ff’s land for a Rehri market. Once the land is found, on demarca(cid:27)on, to belong to the plain(cid:27)ff and there exists a Rehri market which, by defendant’s own pleadings, had been allowed and regulated by it, a decree of mandatory injunc(cid:27)on direct- ing the municipal body to remove such encroachment, is fully jus(cid:27)fied. 32. The argument of the Municipal Corpora(cid:27)on that it has “no con- cern” with the exis(cid:27)ng Rehri market cannot be accepted. A party cannot be permiIed to approbate and reprobate in the same breath – first asser(cid:27)ng control and regulatory power over the site to jus(cid:27)fy its conduct, and later YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 12 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 disowning all concern, when called upon to discharge the corresponding re- sponsibility to remove encroachment. Such a stand is legally untenable. 33. At the same (cid:27)me, it is equally true that this Court cannot, in these proceedings, adjudicate upon the rights and obliga(cid:27)ons of individual Rehri owners, or other encroachers, who are not par(cid:27)es to the suit, nor can it decide disputes between the plain(cid:27)ff and persons whose names are re- flected at Serial Nos.2 to 8 of the demarca(cid:27)on report. The plain(cid:27)ff’s rights vis-à-vis them must be worked out in appropriate proceedings. However, in so far as the respondent municipal body, as a statutory authority, is con- cerned, it can certainly be directed to remove encroachment and to ensure that the plain(cid:27)ff’s land, as iden(cid:27)fied at Serial No.1 in the demarca(cid:27)on re- port, is restored to him. 34. This approach is also consistent with the principle that the Court, par(cid:27)cularly in second appeal, is not powerless to mould relief to do complete jus(cid:27)ce between the par(cid:27)es, once the material facts stand clari- fied and the substan(cid:27)al ques(cid:27)ons of law are answered in favour of the ap- pellant. Conclusion & Direc(cid:6)ons : 35. In view of the discussion above, both the substan(cid:27)al ques(cid:27)ons of law stand answered in favour of the appellant and against the respond- ent–Municipal Corpora(cid:27)on. The concurrent findings of the Courts below, to the extent they rest on non-iden(cid:27)fica(cid:27)on of the suit property and absence of encroachment by the Municipal Council, cannot be sustained in the light of the Court-directed demarca(cid:27)on and the defendant’s own pleadings. 36. Accordingly, the present Regular Second Appeal is partly al- lowed in the following terms: (a) The judgments and decrees of the trial Court dated 08.12.2008 and of the First Appellate Court dated 09.06.2011 are set aside to the ex- YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 13 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 tent they dismiss the suit in rela(cid:27)on to that part of the suit land, which is shown at Serial No.1 in the demarca(cid:27)on report of the Tehsildar, Hoshiarpur (Sabzi Rehri Market) over 1 kanal 10 marlas in Khasra No.46//3/1. (b) A decree of mandatory injunc(cid:27)on is hereby passed, direc(cid:27)ng the defendant–Municipal Council/Corpora(cid:27)on, Hoshiarpur to remove the en(cid:27)re encroachment in the form of the Rehri market from the land shown at Serial No.1 in the demarca(cid:27)on report and to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the said por(cid:27)on to the plain(cid:27)ff/appellants. (c) It shall be the duty and responsibility of the defendant–Muni- cipal Council/Corpora(cid:27)on to take all necessary steps, including seeking as- sistance from the local police and district administra(cid:27)on, to ensure removal of the Rehri market and other unauthorized construc(cid:27)ons/fixtures from the said land within a reasonable period, preferably within a period of six months. (d) The Municipal Council/Corpora(cid:27)on shall be at liberty, in co- ordina(cid:27)on with the Government or concerned authori(cid:27)es, to explore the possibility of providing an alterna(cid:27)ve site to the affected Rehri owners, so that they are not leS remediless. However, the mere absence or non-avail- ability of an alterna(cid:27)ve site shall not be a ground to delay or deny removal of encroachment from the plain(cid:27)ff’s land. (e) In respect of the remaining por(cid:27)ons of the land/suit property and encroachments reflected at Serial Nos.2 to 8 in the demarca(cid:27)on report, it is clarified that no adjudica(cid:27)on is being made in the present proceedings, and the plain(cid:27)ff/appellants shall be at liberty to take such appropriate legal remedies, as may be available to them in law against the concerned en- croachers/occupants. YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 14 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 37. Subject to the above direc(cid:27)ons and clarifica(cid:27)ons, the appeal stands partly allowed. Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly. Demarca(cid:27)on Report of Tehsildar, Hoshiarpur alongwith annexed site plan prepared by him, shall form part & parcel of the decree-sheet. There shall be no order as to costs. 27.11.2025 Yogesh Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 15 of total 15 Pages
Arguments
passing over the bridge of Bhangi Choe, the plain(cid:27)ff no(cid:27)ced that Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma, Tehsildar, along with municipal officers and staff, was standing near the suit property. On making inquiry, the Execu(cid:27)ve Officer of the Municipal Council informed him that the property was being surveyed for construc(cid:27)ng a Rehri market and parking place for trucks and other commercial vehicles. 4.2 The plain(cid:27)ff asserted that the property belonged to him and could not be used for any municipal purpose unless it was acquired in ac- cordance with law. He further pleaded that despite his objec(cid:27)ons and re- quests, the Execu(cid:27)ve Officer claimed power to appropriate the property for such purposes and did not accede to his demand. It was alleged that re- peated requests to the defendant to admit his claim were refused, thereby necessita(cid:27)ng the filing of the suit seeking permanent injunc(cid:27)on against en- croachment and municipal interference. 5.1 Defendant’s stand : Upon no(cid:27)ce, the defendant appeared and in its wriIen statement raised various customary preliminary objec(cid:27)ons, regarding maintainability, lack of jurisdic(cid:27)on of civil court etc. On merits, it was the specific stand of the defendant that the area in dispute, as per site plan prepared by the Municipal Council, formed part of Town Planning Scheme No.7, duly sanc(cid:27)oned by the State Government under relevant no- YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 2 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 (cid:27)fica(cid:27)ons in the years 1967 and 1976. It was pleaded that the scheme had aIained finality and that 95% of the work under the scheme had already been executed. As per the ownership statement in the scheme, the site in dispute vested in the Municipal Council, Hoshiarpur and the khasra num- bers relied upon by the plain(cid:27)ff did not correspond to the site in dispute. 5.2 Defendant further pleaded that the site of Choe extended for about 5 kms from Bahadurpur to Khanpur and that the khasra numbers claimed by the plain(cid:27)ff fell elsewhere and were not even near the site in dispute. It was alleged that the plain(cid:27)ff had ins(cid:27)tuted the suit with mala fide inten(cid:27)on to grab municipal property. It was also stated that donkey owners who used to take sand from the Choe had raised temporary struc- tures at some parts of the site, which were removed by the Municipal Council during an “Opera(cid:27)on Clean”. Some por(cid:27)on of the site had allegedly been previously used as a chowk, where the Municipal Council used to charge Tehbazari from Rehri owners selling vegetables and fruits. 5.3 It was further pleaded that the PWD was the owner of the road from Parbhat Chowk to Goushala Bazar, that bridges over the Choe and the bypass road had been constructed and maintained by PWD, and that the link road from Dhobi Ghat to New Bhangi Bridge was handed over to the Municipal Council by PWD. According to the defendant, when the plain(cid:27)ff learnt that encroachments had been removed and a Rehri market was flourishing at the site, he filed the present suit with ulterior mo(cid:27)ves. The suit was, thus, sought to be dismissed. 6. The plain(cid:27)ff filed replica(cid:27)on, controver(cid:27)ng the averments in the wriIen statement and reitera(cid:27)ng the case as set out in the plaint. 7.1 Findings of the trial Court : On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and evidence was led by both sides. The trial Court, while no- (cid:27)cing the jamabandi entries showing the plain(cid:27)ff as owner of the khasra YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 3 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 numbers detailed in the head-note of the plaint, proceeded to examine whether (i) the iden(cid:27)ty of the suit property, as claimed by the plain(cid:27)ff, stood established, and (ii) whether the defendant had encroached upon any por(cid:27)on of such property. 7.2 The plain(cid:27)ff relied upon the report of the Local Commissioner (Ex.P-8), as per which, one Balbir Singh was in illegal possession of some small por(cid:27)on, one Pawan Kumar was in illegal possession of another por- (cid:27)on, besides existence of Rehris and one sugarcane machine in an area measuring about 1 kanal 12 marlas, whereas the remaining property was lying vacant. The trial Court, however, no(cid:27)ced that the name of the Muni- cipal Council did not figure in the report as having encroached upon any part of the property. 7.3. The trial Court also referred to the tes(cid:27)mony of DW1 Birbal Dass, an official of the Municipal Council, who stated that donkey owners had raised temporary construc(cid:27)ons which were removed during “Opera- (cid:27)on Clean” and that the Municipal CommiIee had not got any Rehri parked over the plain(cid:27)ff’s land. Though the witness admiIed that Tehbazari record was available with the Municipal Council, the plain(cid:27)ff did not summon nor produce any such record to show that the Rehris standing on site were pay- ing Tehbazari to the defendant. 7.4. Holding that (a) the plain(cid:27)ff had failed to prove that the al- leged Rehri market had any nexus with the Municipal Council, and (b) the report of the Local Commissioner did not prove encroachment by the de- fendant, the trial Court dismissed the suit on 08.12.2008. 8.1 Findings of the First Appellate Court : The First Appellate Court re-appraised the evidence and broadly affirmed the findings of the trial Court. It observed that the plain(cid:27)ff had failed to establish the iden(cid:27)ty of the “property in dispute” as being the same land, which he owned as per YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 4 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 the revenue record. PW3 Onkar Singh himself admiIed that he was owner of 12 kanals 17 marlas of land “near” the disputed property and did not specifically state the exact site, where the Rehri market was alleged to ex- ist. 8.2 The Appellate Court further no(cid:27)ced that in the jamabandi entries, the land comprising Khasra Nos. 46-R/2, 3/1, 8 and 9/1 was de- scribed as “gair mumkin Choe” and in the cul(cid:27)va(cid:27)on column, the entry was “Makbooza malkaan”, indica(cid:27)ng non-cul(cid:27)vable land adjoining the Choe. The Appellate Court took the view that in the absence of proper, rule-com- pliant demarca(cid:27)on, it was not possible to correlate these khasra numbers with the physical site, where the Rehri market was alleged to have been es- tablished. 8.3 The First Appellate Court also discarded the Local Commis- sioner’s report, inter alia, on the ground that the demarca(cid:27)on was not car- ried out in accordance with relevant High Court Rules and Orders; pucca points were not affixed; and the officials of the Municipal Council were not associated at the (cid:27)me of demarca(cid:27)on. Reliance was placed on judicial pre- cedents of this Court holding that such a report, not based on proper de- marca(cid:27)on and not associa(cid:27)ng the affected party, cannot be safely relied upon. 8.4 On this reasoning, the First Appellate Court concluded that: (i) the plain(cid:27)ff had failed to prove that the property in dispute formed part of his khasra numbers; (ii) it had not been established that the property did not form part of Town Planning Scheme No.7; and (iii) no encroachment by the Municipal Council was proved. The appeal was accordingly dismissed on 09.06.2011. YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 5 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 Proceedings in second appeal and order for fresh demarca(cid:6)on : 9. Assailing the concurrent findings, learned counsel for the ap- pellant contended before this Court that the Courts below had mis-appreci- ated the evidence, par(cid:27)cularly the Local Commissioner’s report and the revenue record, and had erroneously held that the iden(cid:27)ty of the property and encroachment by the Municipal Council were not established. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent suppor- ted the judgments of the Courts below and submiIed that no interference in second appeal was called for. 11. Considering that the dispute essen(cid:27)ally revolved around whether encroachment existed over Khasra Nos. 46-R/2 (7-15), 3/1 (2-6), 8 (1-3), 9/1 (1-13), measuring 12 kanals 17 marlas, as per jamabandi for the year 1996-97, and no(cid:27)cing the controversy between the par(cid:27)es regarding the actual loca(cid:27)on and iden(cid:27)ty of the site, this Court, vide order dated 08.12.2016, deemed it appropriate, in the interest of jus(cid:27)ce, to direct a fresh, rule-compliant demarca(cid:27)on. The Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur was directed to appoint the Tehsildar to demarcate the proper(cid:27)es afore- men(cid:27)oned, in accordance with law, in the presence of both par(cid:27)es, with the assistance of the revenue record concerning Khasra Nos. men(cid:27)oned by the plain(cid:27)ff as well as Khasra No.46/10, on which the respondent had placed reliance. 12. This direc(cid:27)on, in essence, amounted to seeking addi(cid:27)onal evid- ence in exercise of powers akin to those under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Sec(cid:27)on 107 CPC, to clarify the factual dispute regarding iden(cid:27)ty and loca- (cid:27)on of the suit land, an exercise permissible in second appeal where such evidence is necessary to pronounce judgment and both par(cid:27)es are afforded full opportunity. YOGESH MEHTA 2025.11.27 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 6 of total 15 Pages RSA-4436-2011 13. Pursuant to the above order, the Tehsildar, Hoshiarpur conduc- ted demarca(cid:27)on and submiIed his report annexed with affidavit dated 09.02.2017, along with site plan and notes. ASer se3ng out the methodo- logy and background, the opera(cid:27)ve conclusions recorded by the Tehsildar are that: (cid:1) In Khasra No.46//3/1, over an area of about 1 kanal 10 marlas, a Sabzi Mandi/Rehri Market stands constructed; (cid:1) In other por(cid:27)ons of Khasra Nos. 46//2, 8 and 9/1, there exist a mandir, roads, scrap material and some shops, with specific meas- urements and areas described in karams and marlas; (cid:1) In Khasra Nos. 46//10/2 and 46//10/3, a Gaushala is being construc- ted by the Municipal Corpora(cid:27)on, Hoshiarpur. 14. The municipal body filed objec(cid:27)ons to the demarca(cid:27)on report,