Disposed¶17

Bikrama Singh v. Brij Narayan Singh and Anr.

Patna HC5 Feb 2026C.Misc./1596/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Set-aside/quashing of trial-court order refusing to mark Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner's report as an exhibit; reopening of evidence; liberty to examine court-appointed Pleader Commissioner; fifteen-day window to prove commissioner's report; one-month rebuttal window for respondent; time-bound disposal of suit within three months; Title Suit No. 406 of 2011, Sub-Judge-XV Gopalganj; Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1596 of 2017, decided 05-02-2026.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 07.05.2017 set aside; petitioner granted liberty to examine the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner to prove his report within fifteen days of production/receipt of the order; defendant/respondent at liberty to adduce rebuttal evidence within one month thereafter; suit to be disposed of within three months. ¶17

Bikrama Singh Vs Brij Narayan Singh and Anr. — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the civil miscellaneous application seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 07.05.2017/08.05.2017 of the Sub-Judge-XV, Gopalganj (which rejected the petition for marking the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner's report as an exhibit after reopening evidence) should be granted.

¶12

Court's answer

Since the exercise of appointing the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner had already been taken by the Court, his report appears to be necessary in this case.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 07.05.2017 is hereby set aside, and the petitioner is granted liberty to examine the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner to prove his report.

¶17

Key takeaways

The relevancy and evidentiary value of the Commissioner's report in the decision of the case will be considered at the time of judgment.obiter¶16
For proving the report, the petitioner is granted a period of fifteen days from the date of production/receipt of the order.ratio¶17
If the defendant/respondent wishes to rebut the said evidence, he shall be at liberty to adduce evidence within a period of one month thereafter.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (S. B. Pd. Singh, J.), by order dated 05-02-2026 in C.Misc. No.1596 of 2017, set aside the order dated 07.05.2017/08.05.2017 of the Sub-Judge-XV, Gopalganj in Title Suit No. 406 of 2011, whereby the petitioner's petition dated 24.04.2017 for marking the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner's report as an exhibit after reopening evidence had been rejected on the grounds that the case stood fixed for arguments, the Commissioner's evidence was not important, and the evidence of both parties stood closed. Holding that, the Court having itself appointed the Commissioner, his report appears necessary (its relevancy and evidentiary value to be weighed at the time of judgment), the Court allowed the petitioner fifteen days from production/receipt of the order to examine the Commissioner and prove his report, permitted the defendant/respondent one month thereafter to adduce rebuttal evidence, and directed that the suit be disposed of within three months; the application was disposed of accordingly.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1596 of 2017

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Bikrama Singh Son of late Tapesar Bhagat Resident of Village Bagahawa Mishra, P.O. Sisai, P.S. Bhore, District- Gopalganj.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

Brij Narayan Singh and Anr Son of late Tapesar Bhagar Resident of Village Bagahawa Mishra, P.O. Sisai, P.S. Bhore, District- Gopalganj.

¶7

Sanjay Kumar Singh Son of Harhangi Singh Resident of Village Kushhar , P.O. Sisai, P.S. Bhore, District- Gopalganj.

¶8

... ... Respondent/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dewanand Tiwari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

8 05-02-2026

¶11

Heard learned counsel for both the parties.

¶12

The present civil miscellaneous application has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 07.05.2017/08.05.2017 passed by learned Sub-Judge-XV, Gopalganj in Title Suit No. 406 of 2011 by which he rejected the petition dated 24.04.2017 filed for marking the commissioner’s report as an exhibit after reopening the evidence.

¶13

The report of the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner, who was appointed in this case by order of the Court, was not taken into evidence as it was not exhibited, for which the petitioner had filed a petition. The said petition was rejected solely on the ground that the case was fixed for

¶14

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1596 of 2017(8) dt.05-02-2026 2/3

¶15

arguments and that the evidence of the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner was not important, and further on the ground that the evidence of both the parties had already been closed.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that survey knowing pleader commissioner was appointed by the order of the Court and if the survey knowing pleader commissioner was appointed, his report must come on the record. However, what is the relevancy and evidentiary value of that report in decision of the case will be considered at the time of judgment but if exercise has already been taken by the Court for appointment of survey knowing pleader commissioner, his report appears to be necessary in this case.

¶17

The case has been pending consideration since 2011, and it appears that since 07.05.2017 the matter has been fixed for final arguments. In view of the aforesaid facts, the impugned order dated 07.05.2017 is hereby set aside, and the petitioner is granted liberty to examine the Survey-Knowing Pleader Commissioner to prove his report. For this purpose, the petitioner is granted a period of fifteen days from the date of production/receipt of this order. If the defendant/respondent wishes to rebut the said evidence, he shall be at liberty to adduce evidence within a period of one month thereafter. In any

¶18

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1596 of 2017(8) dt.05-02-2026 3/3

¶19

event, the case shall be disposed of within a period of three months.

¶20