AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Abhinava Upadhya, J.—By means of this writ petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order of the revisional court dated 25.4.2011.
The case of the Petitioner is that Original Suit No. 1548 of 1955 was filed by the father of the Petitioner which was decreed in favour of her father in respect of certain land.
Thereafter, death of the father, mother of the Petitioner then executed a will in her favour in respect of the same land. The Respondents were encroaching upon the suit property. Therefore, a suit for permanent injunction being Suit No. 1151 of 2007 was filed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gorakhpur. In the said suit the Petitioner filed an application with the prayer that a direction be issued to the relevant authority to prepare a scale map of the suit property and then the said scale map were superimposed upon the map attached with the plaint in Suit No. 1548 of 1955.
The court below partly allowed the application, inasmuch as, directed for preparing a scale map and rejected the prayer for superimposing on the map upon the plaint in Suit No. 1548 of 1955. The ground for refusal was that the Petitioner had not filed the plaint of the Suit No. 1548 of 1955.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner then drew my attention to the order of the revisional court wherein it has been categorically stated that the plaint, judgment and decree of Suit No. 1548 of 1955 have been filed.
Therefore, the contention is that the finding recorded by the trial court is perverse. The revisional court went on to hold that there was no error in the order of the trial court who partly allowed the application for preparing a scale may of the suit property. Hence, this writ petition.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and have perused the order of the court below.
In my view, no prejudice is being caused to the Petitioner by the impugned order After the scale map is prepared, it can always be relied upon for identifying the property of the present suit. The Petitioner, if aggrieved in any way by any of the proceedings, the same can always be raised in appeal in case suit is decided against the Petitioner.
There is no merit in the petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed.