Dismissed

Bhagwana v. Dhannaram and Ors.

Rajasthan HC14 Feb 2018CW/2387/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the trial court's rejection of an application to appoint a Commissioner regarding an electric connection. The High Court found no error in the lower court's order, holding that parties cannot collect evidence via Commissioner appointment to support their defense. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as wholly misconceived.

Bhagwana Vs Dhannaram and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2387 / 2018

¶3

Bhagwana S/o Ramdeva, by Caste Jat, Aged About 52 Years, Resident of Village Rampura, At Present Dhani Samvay Tan Village Kasli Tehsil Dhodh District Sikar (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Dhannaram S/o Late Hanmaan, by Caste Jat, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Village Rampura, At Present Dhani Samvay Tan Village Kasli Tehsil Dhodh District Sikar (Raj.)

¶7

Assistant Engineer, AVVNL ( O and M), Dhodh Tehsil, Dhodh District Sikar (Raj.)

¶8

Superintendent Engineer AVVNL Sabalpura Power House, Sikar, Tehsil and District Sikar (Raj.)

¶9

AVVNL Ajmer Through General Manager AVVNL, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶10

Jamna D/o Ramdeva, by Caste Jat, Aged About 41 Years, Resident of Village Rampura, At Present Dhani Samvay Tan Village Kasli Tehsil Dhodh District Sikar (Raj.)

¶11

Mohri W/o Ramdeva, by Caste Jat, Aged About 81 Years, Resident of Village Rampura, At Present Dhani Samvay Tan Village Kasli Tehsil Dhodh District Sikar (Raj.)

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshat Choudhary, Adv.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Judgment / Order

¶15

14/02/2018

¶16

Instant writ petition seeks to challenge the order dated

¶17

16/01/2018 passed by the learned trial court whereby the

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-2387/2018]

¶20

application moved by the defendant-petitioner for appointing Commissioner to report whether the electric connection No.2203/0096 was in Khasra No.1268 or Khasra No.1265 has been rejected.

¶21

Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner submits that the defendants are using the electric connection which is in their name and the said connection was issued for Khasra No.1265. To prove this fact and to show that there may be no ambiguity, it would have been appropriate for the learned trial court to have allowed the application for appointment of Commissioner. The action of not appointing the Commissioner would result in an ambiguity.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel, this Court finds that the learned trial court has taken into consideration the submissions as noted above and has rejected the application on the ground that the defendants-petitioner want to create and collect evidence in support of their defence by appointing Commissioner which could not be allowed. It is settled principle of law that no party to the suit can collect evidence in their support by appointing of Commissioner. The issues would be framed and evidence has to be produced by the respective parties in support of their averments. The application for appointing Commissioner for the said purpose, therefore, was found to be wholly not maintainable and accordingly rejected.

¶23

Having gone through the order impugned and after thoughtfully considering the submissions of learned counsel, this Court does not find any error in the order impugned so as to call

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CW-2387/2018]

¶26

for interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution

¶27

of India.

¶28

Consequently, the writ petition is wholly misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶29

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J.

Bhagwana v. Dhannaram and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwana v. Dhannaram and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Vs Kaptan Singh and Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Roop Narayan Vs Jayana Bai

Bhawani Singh and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through P.P.

Choudhary Educational Institute Vs Ncte and Anr.

Wajim Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp