1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. SECOND APPEAL NO.338 OF 2006. Kisan S/o Mahadeo Khanore ... Appellant. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.S.Y.Patil, advocate for the appellant. Mrs.R.K.Ladda, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 01.09.2010. PER COURT 1. The appellant is the original plaintiff, had filed a suit for perpetual injunction. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the well was dug in his land 2 bearing Gat No.88, whereas the case of the Respondents is that the well was dug in Gat No. 90. The appellate Court had ordered measurement to be carried out by the T.I.L.R. In the measurement, the suit wells were shown in land Gat No.88 owned by the plaintiff/appellant. The lower appellate Court has disbelieved the measurement map on the ground that the same has not been proved. 2. It is a trite law that the maps such as prepared by the T.I.L.R. are not directly admissible in evidence and they are to be proved in view of Section 83 of the Indian Evidence Act read with Order XXVI Rule 10 of the C.P.C. 3. Though the lower appellate Court had directed measurement of the said lands Gat No.88 and Gat No.90 in question, no opportunity is given to adduce the evidence. In such circumstances, there is a failure of justice. After the measurement was ordered, the Court ought to have allowed the parties to adduce their evidence. The substantial right can not be 3 denied on such a ground. 4. In light of the same, I am inclined to partly allow the appeal by setting aside the impugned orders and relegate the parties to the trial Court so as to enable them to adduce the evidence on the measurement carried out by the cadastral surveyor pursuant to the orders of the Court. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgments are quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Civil Judge (S.D.), Osmanabad. The parties to appear before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Osmanabad on 4th October, 2010. The Civil Judge (S.D.) shall afford opportunity to the parties to lead evidence on the said map submitted by the cadastral surveyor and then shall decide the matter afresh. The Second Appeal is accordingly disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/sa33806 4