This writ petition challenging an order rejecting inspection of a subject house is disposed of as the High Court finds no jurisdictional error in the lower court's decision, allowing alternative proof through a private architect.
Writ petition is finally disposed of; no jurisdictional error found in the impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (227) No.668 of 2017
Dinesh Kumar Sonwani S/o Kashyap Kumar Sonwani, Aged About 35 Years R/o Plot No. 32, R. K. Residency, Ghuru Ameri Road, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra Bilaspur, Police Station Sirgitti, Tahsil Civil & Revneue District Bilapsur, Chhattisgarh. (Defendant)
---- Petitioner
Versus
Prathmesh Mishra S/o Hardev Dutt Mishra, Aged About 50 Years R/o Azad Nagar, Masanganj, Bilspur, At Present R/o R.K. Residency, Ghuru Ameri Road, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra Bilaspur, Police Station Sirgitti, Tahsil, Civil & Revenue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Plaintiff)
--- Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board
14/09/2017
(1) The application filed by the petitioner under Order 26 Rule 9 read with Order 39 Rule 7 of CPC for inspection of the subject house has been rejected by the trial Court by order dated 09.05.2017 against which this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner herein.
(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad-in-law.
(3 ) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(4) The trial Court has rejected the application holding that no inspection is required in which I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. However, the petitioner is free to get inspection of the subject house through the private Architect and submit a report
2
and to prove the same, strictly in accordance with law.
(5) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge
L/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial Court committed jurisdictional error in rejecting the petitioner's application for inspection of the subject house.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dinesh Kumar Sonwani
Prathmesh Mishra
Sanjay K. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
