owned by the plaintiff, whereas, the adjoining Khasra No.577 is owned by the defendant. Local Commissioner, before visiting the spot, issued notice to the parties. As per the report of the Local Commissioner, the wife and son of the defendant were present but they had refused to sign the attendance sheet. The defendant had filed objections to the report of the Local Commissioner on the ground that no notice had been issued to him by the Local Commissioner and the measurement had not been taken in accordance with law. However, the defendant failed to call the Local Commissioner for the purpose of cross-examination after his report was tendered in evidence as Ex.P-5. Although the plaintiff had assured that he would produce the Local Commissioner as a witness but this did not preclude the defendant from calling the Local Commissioner in the witness box for the purpose of crossexamination and as such the Courts below rightly held that the appellant-defendant had failed to rebut the report of the Local Commissioner. The onus was on the defendant-appellant to summon the Local Commissioner for the purpose of crossexamination. The plaintiff and his brother had purchased khasra No.593 vide registered sale deed Ex.P-1, whereas, the portion of the said khasra number had been encroached upon by the defendant.
