AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.P. Chandrakantharaj Urs, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order dated 22.8.1987 made by the Principal Munsiff, Bantwal, in O.S. No. 1 11/1986. By the said order, despite the objection, he refused to refer back the Commissioner''s report in the light of the objections filed by the Plaintiff. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is preferred.
Reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Stella v. Nathalla M.S.A. No. 105/1972 by Govinda Bhat, C.J., as he then was [See Item No. 296 ; Short Notes of cases (1974 KLJ 77).It is true, there it has been i observed that the Commissioner may be called upon to submit a further report in answer to the objections filed by parties. That is now obviated by the amendment made to Rule 10 of Order 26 of the CPC by which report is to be treated as part of the evidence and the parties to the suit are permitted to file their objections to the Commissioner''s report. The Plaintiff may avail himself of that provision and disprove the accuracy of the Commissioner''s report by leading independent evidence or cross-examining the Commissioner on his report instead of calling for fresh report in the light of his objections.
3.1 do not see any error of jurisdiction in the order in question. The revision petition is misconceived and it is rejected.