Prabir Kumar Samanta, J. - (1.) This revisional application is directed against the order dated 19th August, 2002 thereby refusing the defendant's prayer for cross-examination of the Pleader Commissioner who submitted his report upon local investigation. The plaintiff/opposite party having raised an objection against the said report examined the Pleader Commissioner whereupon the defendant/petitioner prayed for such cross- examination of the Pleader Commissioner. The learned Trial Court refused to give permission to the defendant/petitioner to cross- examine the learned Commissioner only because no written objection was filed against the said report by him.
(2.) Order 26, Rule 10(2) of the Code provides as under:- "Report and depositions to be evidence in suit - The report of the commissioner and the evidence taken by him [but not the evidence without the report] shall be evidence in the suit and shall form part of the record; but the Court or, with the permission of the Court, any of the parties to the suit may examine the Commissioner personally in open Court touching any of the matters referred to him or mentioned in his report, or as to his report, or as to the manner in which he has made the investigation."
(3.) Upon bare perusal of the said provision, it is abundantly clear that either of the parties with the permission of the Court may examine the Commissioner personally in open Court in relation to his report and the manner in which the investigation was made by the investigating Commissioner. On the face of the said provision, it does not appear that such examination would be permissible only in the event of an objection being raised against the said report. Such examination in the facts and circumstances of the case may be by any of the parties to the suit who may support such report.;