Rajasthan High CourtRam Chandra And Ors vs Moti Lal And Ors on 11 September, 2008Author:Dalip SinghBench:Dalip SinghIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT 
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

ORDER

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4966/2008
Ram Chandra & Ors. 
Vs.
 State of Rajasthan & Ors.

11.9.2008.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH


Shri R.K. Agarwal, for the petitioner.Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta, Addl. Government Counsel.This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the learned court below on the application for grant of temporary injunction Annexure-11 by the learned trial court and the learned lower appellate court on the appeal being filed by the present petitioner Annexure-12.The dispute which has been raised is that the petitioner is the khatedar in  khasra Nos. 3333 and 3334 in village Bhopon ka Bara behind Sofia School, Ajmer. The case of the petitioner is that the khasra No.3331 is the land which was allotted to the respondent and on which the respondents No. 1 to 3 are raising construction by encroaching portion of the land of the petitioner by construction of wall. The dispute is on account of the construction of the wall allegedly by the respondent. The two courts have decided the matter with regard to the grant of temporary injunction against the plaintiff petitioner and hence this writ petition.Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sreepat Vs. Rajendra Prasad & Ors. Reported in JT 2000 (7) SC 379 that when there is a dispute with regard to the area of boundary of the land specially when the identity of the land cannot be ascertained it is safe for the court to have a survey Commissioner appointed to survey the location of the land in dispute and thereafter decide the case in the light of the above report of Survey Commissioner.I have considered the above submission. However, on the basis of the material which was available with the learned court below while deciding the application I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order in writ jurisdiction underArticle 226of the Constitution of India as I find no jurisdictional error.Having said so, so far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to the appointment of Survey Commissioner is concerned it is made clear that it would be open for the petitioner to apply before the learned trial court for appointment of the Survey Commissioner or sending a requisition to the Sub Divisional Officer/Collector for appointing a responsible officer to carry out the survey of khasra Nos. 3333, 3334 and 3331 on the basis of the revenue record on the spot and prepare a report pointing out the extent of construction being raised  by the defendant indicating its exact location i.e. Khasra No.3333, 3334 or 3331 or any other land.In case such application is filed it is expected that the learned trial court would decide the same in accordance with law.Subject to the above, this writ petition stands disposed of.(DALIP SINGH),J.Ramchandrkhatri,PS