RAJ KUMAR Vs. HARI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Neighbouring landowners are the contesting parties here and the dispute between them, pertains to trees growing near the common boundary of their land.

(2.) According to the plaintiff. the trees were growing on his land and he consequently sought an injunction to restrain the defendant from cutting and removing them. In this behalf, the plaintiff averred that it was he who had planted and nursed these trees. The defendant, on the other hand, claimed that the trees were in fact growing on his land and it was he who had planted and nursed them.

(3.) When the matter was pending before the trial court, a Local Commissioner was appointed, namely the Halqa Kanungo Jagdish Ram to go to the spot and after carrying out the necessary measurements to report whether the trees were on the land of the plaintiff or defendant. This Local Commissioner was appointed with the consent of both the parties and when he went to the spot to carry out these measurements, both the parties with their counsel were present there at that time. According to the report of the Local Commissioner, the trees were located not on the land of the plaintiff but on that of the defendant. Objections to this report were later filed by the plaintiff and the trial court overruled them after taking into account also the evidence led in support thereof. A further finding was returned by the trial court in favour of the defendant that the trees had been planted and nursed by the defendant. The suit of the plaintiff was consequently dismissed.