Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the Haryana Waqf Board against the dismissal of their second appeal by the High Court, which was based on concurrent findings of fact from lower courts. The appellant sought a declaration and injunction regarding alleged encroachment by the respondents on land belonging to the Board. The High Court dismissed the appeal summarily, concluding that the Board had failed to prove encroachment. However, the Supreme Court found that the High Court did not adequately consider the need for a Local Commissioner to demarcate the disputed land, which was crucial given the nature of the dispute. The Supreme Court noted that the trial court had rejected an application for demarcation without proper consideration of the pleadings and the lack of specific denial from the respondents regarding unauthorized possession. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the second appeal, and directed the High Court to decide the matter on merits within six months. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Appointment of Local Commissioner - Necessity for Demarcation - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 26 Rule 9 - The High Court failed to consider the necessity of appointing a Local Commissioner for demarcation of the suit land despite the dispute regarding encroachment. The Supreme Court held that the High Court should have examined this aspect before dismissing the appeal summarily (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in summarily dismissing the second appeal based on concurrent findings of fact without considering the need for a Local Commissioner for demarcation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the second appeal for consideration on merits, directing the High Court to decide the matter within six months.
Law Points
- Civil Procedure
- Local Commissioner
- Encroachment
- Concurrent Findings
- Demarcation
