HIGH CGURT OF CHHATTESGARH T ESLA$§1§R rit Petitian {Art22?§ NG.924 6f 2019 Anii Kishare Mishra,‘ S/o Late Hemiai Méshra, aged absut 45 years, Ric Baikumhpur, Raigam, District- Raigarh (06.) Petitianei’ Piamtif Veisus Respcm‘ani Pramcci Kumar Dubey, 8/0 Late Defendant Shyam La! Dubey, aged absut 51 years Ric Baikunihpur, Raigarh, Disti'ict-Raigarh (0.8.) \ \iréi Petitiqn under Articie 227 0f the Censtitution of Endia) MLAdié Minhaj, counsai far ihe peiiiioner. Mtuourabh Sharma, counsei for the respondent. {33: Hon’bie Mr. 1?. $harma, J; ’ ORDER (234i 1—2Q1 1) i. By ihis writ petitian under Articre 22? of ihe Consdtutien of indie the petitianer has chaiienged the iegality and prepriety of the order dated 1.2.2610 passed by the Third Additianar District Judge (F.T.C._‘;, Raigarh, in Misecivii Appeai No.21/09, reversing the order dated 4.820% passed by the Third Civit Judge Class—it, Reigarh, tn Civtl Suit No.62Aiog, whereby the Third Ctvii Judge Ciass-ii has aiiowed the apptication fiied by the petittener under Order 39 Ruie t & 2 of the Code of Civii Precedure. 2. t have heard teamed ceunset tor the parties, perused the order tmpughed, edpies of other orders and copy at the appiicatien. 3. inttiatiy injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner. After rejection of demarcation report by the Coiieotor the respondent has tiied appiication for recaiiingimodification or' the order of temporary injunction dismissed by the Third Civii Judge diass—ii and oy’ aiiowing the appiioation Third Additionai Bistrict Judge has quashed the order of temporary injunction in terms of Order 39 Ruie t & 2 or‘ the Code of Uivii Procedure, f 4. AH submissions af ihepart'ies, dscumenis and orcier impugned revea that virtuaiiy this is boundary dispuie and may be decided aniy by appointing Commission for iocai inspection under 0rdei 25 Rule E»? of the Code of Civii Procedure in these circumstances, both the Courts beiow ought to have directed the parties for iocai inspection by appointment commission instead of reiying contraoiotory documents ¥l med by the parties. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that (n the petitioner may fiie appiication, may be in mandatory form, for appointment of Commission for iocai inspection under Order 26 Ruie9 of the Code of Civii Prooedure within 45 days trom'today and if such appiioation is fiied then the Court after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties shaii pass the appropriate order. Parties shaii maintain status—quo tiii 45 days from today. If application for iooai inspection by appointing Commission is aiiowed, then the triai $oprt may a iiberty extend the order of status-duo passed by this Court tiii disposai of the appiioation for grant of temporary injunction under Grder 39 Ruie i 8: 2 of the Code of Civii Procedure. No order as to costs. 6. interim appiioation stands disposed of. I , Sd/— T.P. Sharma Judge _ZP