IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(U/A 227) No. igrr /2011 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : f Smt. Indu Bai, W/o. Dauwa £%¥ET§%§§%N0.1 Prasad Dubey, aged about 68 years, R/o. Village Suma, Post Suma, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS / ,3. RESP FLAI£T1§¥§13TS 1] Mahesh Kumar, S/o. Ramanand (K Sharma, aged about 57 years, \l R/o. Village Fingeshwar, Tahsil mvwi)” if 2 2] Rajim, District Raipur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, through: Collector, Raipur (C.G.) ....(Defendantno.2) HIGH COURT OF CHI-IATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (227) N0. 875/2011 PETITIONER : Smt. Indu Bai Versus RESPONDENTS : Mahwh Kumar and another Aggearance: ShriuManoj Paranjpe and Shn' Gurudev I Sharan, counsel for the petitioner. ' - Shri R.R. Sinha, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.2. \VRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORAL ORDER (14.02.2011) Suit between the parties was allowed by the Tn'al Court by judgment and decree dated 22nd September, 2009, however first appeal preferred by petitioner was allowed on the ground that the learned Trial Court has not recorded any fmding on additional issue which was framed on 2/02/2009. The Appellate Court remanded the matter for decision afresh on all issues. (2) After remand petitioner moved an application under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC for issuance of commission for local investigation for ascertaining the valuation of the land. The Trial Court has rejected 1 theapplication on the ground that the parties to the su'it cannot be i permitted to collect evidence under the provisions contained in Order ‘26 Rule 9 CPC and that the parties would be free to lead their / . : . ‘ evidence to prove issue regarding valuation of the suit property. t (3) Learned counsel would submit that the learned Trial Court committed serious illegality by rejecting theprayer made under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC. He would submit that the issuance of commission is necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case so that the Court is properly assisted to decide the issue regarding valuation (4) On perusal of the document annexed with the writ petition including the subject application it appears to' this Court that the petitioner is entitled to lead evidence to prove the issue regarding valuation and for that issuance of commission for local investigation is not required. (5) Learned Trial Court has not committed any illegality or material irregularity in rejecting the application under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC. (6) There is no substance in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India which fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge