Kaushalya Devi v. Banwari Lal and Others Lal and Others
Case Details
CR-6735-2025 (O& (O&M) -1- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- CR CR-6735-2025 (O&M) Decided on :- 22.09.2025 Decided on : Koshlya Devi @ Kaushalya Devi Koshlya Devi @ Kaushalya Devi ....Petitioner VERSUS Banwari Lal and Others Lal and Others ....Respondents
Legal Reasoning
MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE M Present: Mr. Gurinder Singh Dhillon , Advocate and Mr. Gurinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate and Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Inderjeet Sihag, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Inderjeet Sihag MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU -.- 1. revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The present civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The present civil the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Abohar, whereby the application moved by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Abohar, whereby the application moved by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Abohar, whereby the application moved by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Abohar, whereby the application moved by the defendants– r 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a –respondents under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a r 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a Local Commissioner was allowed. Local Commissioner was allowed. Brief Facts 2. petitioner filed a suit for permanent The plaintiff–petitioner filed a suit for permanent petitioner filed a suit for permanent The plaintiff injunction injunction injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in her peaceful possession over land restraining the defendants from interfering in her peaceful possession over land restraining the defendants from interfering in her peaceful possession over land restraining the defendants from interfering in her peaceful possession over land 90, Khasra Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 as per Jamabandi for the comprised in Rectangle No.190, Khasra Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 as per Jamabandi for the 90, Khasra Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 as per Jamabandi for the comprised in Rectangle No.1 Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka 2021, situated at village Waryamkhera, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka 2021, situated at village Waryamkhera, year 2020–2021, situated at village Waryamkhera, and further restraining them from uprooting the standing crop and plants standing and further restraining them from uprooting the standing crop and plants standing and further restraining them from uprooting the standing crop and plants standing and further restraining them from uprooting the standing crop and plants standing thereon. The case of the plaintiff is t hat the defendants are strangers to the suit land The case of the plaintiff is that the defendants are strangers to the suit land hat the defendants are strangers to the suit land and have no concern with it. and have no concern with it. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.23 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6735-2025 (O& (O&M) -2- - 3. In the written statement, the defendants pleaded that the plaintiff is In the written statement, the defendants pleaded that the plaintiff is In the written statement, the defendants pleaded that the plaintiff is In the written statement, the defendants pleaded that the plaintiff is ather, the actual possession is with Sanjeev Bhadu, not in possession of the land, rather, the actual possession is with Sanjeev Bhadu, ather, the actual possession is with Sanjeev Bhadu, not in possession of the land the son-in-law of the plaintiff. It was alleged that the suit has been filed at his law of the plaintiff. It was alleged that the suit has been filed at his the plaintiff. It was alleged that the suit has been filed at his instance only to obstruct a rasta (pathway) which is the only means of ingress and instance only to obstruct a rasta (pathway) which is the only means of ingress and instance only to obstruct a rasta (pathway) which is the only means of ingress and instance only to obstruct a rasta (pathway) which is the only means of ingress and egress to the agricultural land and residential houses of the defendants. It was egress to the agricultural land and residential houses of the defendants. It was egress to the agricultural land and residential houses of the defendants. It was egress to the agricultural land and residential houses of the defendants. It was id rasta passes through various rectangles including the suit further stated that the said rasta passes through various rectangles including the suit id rasta passes through various rectangles including the suit further stated that the sa land, and even underground water pipeline has been laid through the said path. land, and even underground water pipeline has been laid through the said path. land, and even underground water pipeline has been laid through the said path. land, and even underground water pipeline has been laid through the said path. claim Along with their written statement, the defendants also filed a counter-claim Along with their written statement, the defendants also filed a counter Along with their written statement, the defendants also filed a counter aintiff from damaging the rasta and pipeline. seeking injunction restraining the plaintiff from damaging the rasta and pipeline. aintiff from damaging the rasta and pipeline. seeking injunction restraining the pl 4. A separate application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC was filed by the A separate application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC was filed by the A separate application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC was filed by the A separate application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC was filed by the defendants praying for appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the spot defendants praying for appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the spot defendants praying for appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the spot defendants praying for appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the spot he disputed rasta. The and report regarding the existence, location, and nature of the disputed rasta. The and report regarding the existence, location, and nature of t and report regarding the existence, location, and nature of t , after hearing both sides, allowed the application vide impugned order trial Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the application vide impugned order , after hearing both sides, allowed the application vide impugned order , after hearing both sides, allowed the application vide impugned order dated 21.08.2025 and appointed a Local Commissioner. dated 21.08.2025 and appointed a Local Commissioner. dated 21.08.2025 and appointed a Local Commissioner. Submissions on Behalf of the Petitioner Submissions on Behalf of the Petitioner 5. mpugned order Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the i Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the i contending that in various other civil suits filed by the defendants against Sanjeev contending that in various other civil suits filed by the defendants against Sanjeev contending that in various other civil suits filed by the defendants against Sanjeev contending that in various other civil suits filed by the defendants against Sanjeev law of the present petitioner, similar applications under Order 26 Kumar, son-in-law of the present petitioner, similar applications under Order 26 law of the present petitioner, similar applications under Order 26 law of the present petitioner, similar applications under Order 26 aken a Rule 9 CPC had been dismissed, yet in the present case the trial Court has taken a Rule 9 CPC had been dismissed, yet in the present case the trial Rule 9 CPC had been dismissed, yet in the present case the trial should have considered the earlier orders contrary view. It is argued that the Court should have considered the earlier orders should have considered the earlier orders contrary view. It is argued that the as well. It was further submitted that a Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to as well. It was further submitted that a Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to as well. It was further submitted that a Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to as well. It was further submitted that a Local Commissioner cannot be appointed to collect evidence on behalf of either party, and the impugned order permitting the collect evidence on behalf of either party, and the impugned order permitting the collect evidence on behalf of either party, and the impugned order permitting the collect evidence on behalf of either party, and the impugned order permitting the same is wholly unsustainable. same is wholly unsustainable. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.23 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6735-2025 (O& (O&M) Findings -3- - 6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the record. 7. The main controversy in the present case revolves around the The main controversy in the present case revolves around the The main controversy in the present case revolves around the The main controversy in the present case revolves around the passing through the existence, nature, and location of the disputed rasta allegedly passing through the existence, nature, and location of the disputed rasta allegedly existence, nature, and location of the disputed rasta allegedly suit land and other rectangles, and whether the same is being used by the suit land and other rectangles, and whether the same is being used by the suit land and other rectangles, and whether the same is being used by the suit land and other rectangles, and whether the same is being used by the defendants for access to their agricultural land and residential houses. The defendants for access to their agricultural land and residential houses. The defendants for access to their agricultural land and residential houses. The defendants for access to their agricultural land and residential houses. The defendants have also claimed existence of an underground water pipeline laid defendants have also claimed existence of an underground water pipeline laid defendants have also claimed existence of an underground water pipeline laid defendants have also claimed existence of an underground water pipeline laid the said path. These questions cannot be effectively determined merely on beneath the said path. These questions cannot be effectively determined merely on the said path. These questions cannot be effectively determined merely on the said path. These questions cannot be effectively determined merely on the basis of revenue entries or pleadings of the parties. Local investigation is the basis of revenue entries or pleadings of the parties. Local investigation is the basis of revenue entries or pleadings of the parties. Local investigation is the basis of revenue entries or pleadings of the parties. Local investigation is clearly necessary to elucidate the matter in controversy. clearly necessary to elucidate the matter in controversy. clearly necessary to elucidate the matter in controversy. 8. a Local Commissioner under It is well settled that appointment of a Local Commissioner under It is well settled that appointment of It is well settled that appointment of Order 26 Rule 9 CPC is justified where the Court Order 26 Rule 9 CPC is justified where the finds that local investigation is Court finds that local investigation is essential for a just decision of the case. Such appointment is particularly essential for a just decision of the case. Such appointment is particularly essential for a just decision of the case. Such appointment is particularly essential for a just decision of the case. Such appointment is particularly l physical appropriate in matters involving rights of way and paths, where actual physical appropriate in matters involving rights of way and paths, where actua appropriate in matters involving rights of way and paths, where actua features at the spot are relevant and cannot be properly appreciated without features at the spot are relevant and cannot be properly appreciated without features at the spot are relevant and cannot be properly appreciated without features at the spot are relevant and cannot be properly appreciated without inspection. 9. The contention of the petitioner that in other suits similar applications The contention of the petitioner that in other suits similar applications The contention of the petitioner that in other suits similar applications The contention of the petitioner that in other suits similar applications had been dismissed does not advance the case of petitioner had been dismissed does not advance e has the case of petitioner-plaintiff. Each case has to be decided on its own pleadings and facts. The dispute regarding the rasta in the to be decided on its own pleadings and facts. The dispute regarding the rasta in the to be decided on its own pleadings and facts. The dispute regarding the rasta in the to be decided on its own pleadings and facts. The dispute regarding the rasta in the present case is the core issue, and the trial Court present case is the core issue, and the trial has rightly exercised its discretion Court has rightly exercised its discretion in appointing a Local Commissioner. in appointing a Local Commissioner. 10. pointment amounts to collecting The further submission that such appointment amounts to collecting The further submission that such ap The further submission that such ap evidence on behalf of a party is also without merit. A Local Commissioner’s report evidence on behalf of a party is also without merit. A Local Commissioner’s report evidence on behalf of a party is also without merit. A Local Commissioner’s report evidence on behalf of a party is also without merit. A Local Commissioner’s report in appreciating the is not substantive evidence by itself; it only assists the Court in appreciating the is not substantive evidence by itself; it only assists the is not substantive evidence by itself; it only assists the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.23 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6735-2025 (O& (O&M) -4- - le objections to the report and controversy. The parties will still have the right to file objections to the report and controversy. The parties will still have the right to fi controversy. The parties will still have the right to fi to lead their independent evidence. to lead their independent evidence. Conclusion 11.
Decision
finds no illegality or perversity in the In view of the above, this Court finds no illegality or perversity in the finds no illegality or perversity in the In view of the above, this impugned order dated 21.08.2025 warranting interference under Article 227 of the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 warranting interference under Article 227 of the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 warranting interference under Article 227 of the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of I has rightly held that a local investigation is nstitution of India. The trial Court has rightly held that a local investigation is has rightly held that a local investigation is required for just adjudication of the dispute regarding existence and nature of the required for just adjudication of the dispute regarding existence and nature of the required for just adjudication of the dispute regarding existence and nature of the required for just adjudication of the dispute regarding existence and nature of the disputed rasta. 12. 13. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. September 22, 2025 2025 tripti (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.23 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document