RADHARANI MONDAL Vs. BHIMA BHARNA DEY
LAWS(CAL)-1983-8-5
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on August 24,1983

RADHARANI MONDAL Appellant
VERSUS
BHIMA BHARNA DEY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS application for civil revision under section 115 of the code of Civil Procedure is directed against an order passed by the learned Munsif, 1st court, Tamluk by Order No. 111 dated 5th of May, 1979 accepting the report and the field book of the Pleader Commissioner appointed by him in the Title Suit No. 15 of 1973.
(2.) MR. Chatterjee, counsel for the petitioner has criticised this report as an invalid defective and irregular one because the learned Munsif did not assign any reason for such an order. His contention is that as it is not a reasoned order, the order should be set aside. Mr. Chatterjee argues that if the reasons are not given it will be difficult for party aggrieved by such an order to challenge it.
(3.) MR. Chatterjee referred to me a judgment reported in 84 CWN page 130 ( Santilata Mitra v. Amal Lahiri ) also passed in an application under Section 115 of the code of Civil Procedure relating to a matter however under Order 39 Rule 7 of the said code. G. N. Ray, J. held therein that a court is required to form a prima facie opinion that a case for further detention, preservation or inspection has been made by a party and for proper action investigation by a commissioner is required to be made. Accordingly, the order passed under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil procedure the party against whom the order is passed is entitled to move this Court and he remanded the matter directing to consider the application under Order 39 rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure on merit afresh and disposed of the said application after giving the reasons. It may be noted here that Ray, J. directed reasons to be given when an order is passed for ordering investigation under Order 39 Rule 7 and not when accepting report under Order 26 Rule 13: moreover an order passed under Order 39 Rule 7 directing an investigation is quite different from an order accepting a report of Pleader Commissioner after investigation. More reasons would have been desirable but desirability does not mean essentiality.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.