Citation

 Citation

CDJ 2003 BHC 574

Case Law Referred :
1.Kausabai Keshav Dushinge V/s Revubai Daji Jare and Ors. and another 1995 (2) Mh.L.J. page 951 (Para 4).
2.Sumera Vs. Madanlal and Ors. AIR 1989 MP 224 (Para 4).
3.Rani Choudhury Vs. Lt. Col. Suraj Jit Choudhury AIR 1982 SC 1397 (Para 4).

COMPARATIVE CITATIONS:
2003 (1) ALL MR 42, 2003 AIR(Bom) 52, 2003 (2) BCR 627, 2003 (1) MAH.L.R 218

Head note

The trial Court in the present case has proceeded to decree the suit essentially relying on the Commissioner's report and on the assumption that the said report has been proved. For assuming that the said report has been proved, the trial Court perhaps took note of the fact that defendant did not raise any objection with reference to the Commissioner's report. Merely because no objection was raised by the defendant to the Commissioner's report that does not mean that the report stands proved on record. There is established procedure known to law by which the Commissioner's report can be proved on evidence. That has not been done in the present case. In such a situation, the trial Court could not have decided the suit on merits. For, in absence of any oral evidence or for that matter evidence by way of affidavit of any party, the issues as framed cannot be decided as having been established one way or the other. In the circumstances, there is palpable and manifest material irregularity committed by the trial Court in the conduct of the trial in the present case. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

First Appeal No. 474 of 1988

Decided On: 09.08.2002

Khurshed Banoo Vs. Vasant Mallikarjun Manthalkar

Hon'ble Judges: 

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

Citation: AIR 2003 Bom 52

#commissioner

#advocatecommissioner