Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Wheather Munsiff Can Suo Motu Remit the Report to the Commissioner
Suo Motu Remission by Munsiff - Generally, a Munsiff (a subordinate court judge) does not have the authority to suo motu remit a commission report for further inquiry or to appoint a new Commissioner without an application or specific grounds. Remission is typically initiated upon an application by a party showing discrepancies or deficiencies in the report. ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2926"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48373"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 42180"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43797"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 75469"]
Court’s Power to Remit - Courts can remit a commission report if they find it incomplete, inaccurate, or if there are objections that need to be addressed, but usually upon an application by a party, not suo motu. The court may examine the Commissioner and the report before deciding whether to remit or set aside the report. ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2926"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48373"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 42180"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43797"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 75469"]
Case Law and Practice - Several cases highlight that courts, including Munsiffs, typically act upon applications to remit reports. The court's discretion is exercised after examining objections or discrepancies raised by parties. The court may also question the Commissioner and the surveyor during hearings to determine the necessity of remitting the report. ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48373"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 42180"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43797"]
Suo Motu Action Not Standard - The evidence suggests that Munsiffs generally do not suo motu remit reports without an application or specific reasons. Instead, they rely on objections or issues raised by parties to decide on remittance. ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2926"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48373"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43797"]
Analysis and Conclusion:
Main Point: A Munsiff typically cannot suo motu remit a commission report to the Commissioner without an application from a party showing the report's inadequacies. The court’s authority to remit is exercised based on objections, discrepancies, or deficiencies raised during the proceedings.
Insight: The practice emphasizes the importance of parties raising objections or applications for remittance, after which the court may examine the Commissioner and decide whether remittance is necessary. The court’s role is to ensure the report's accuracy and completeness, but this is generally initiated by parties, not suo motu.
References: The references from multiple cases and orders consistently indicate that courts, including Munsiffs, act upon applications rather than suo motu remitting commission reports. The courts examine objections and the report itself before remitting or setting aside the report.
Summary:A Munsiff cannot suo motu remit a commission report to the Commissioner. Remission is typically initiated through an application by a party, and the court’s decision depends on examining objections, discrepancies, or deficiencies in the report.
In in India, commissions play a crucial role in gathering evidence, especially for local investigations or property measurements. However, disputes often arise over the . A common question among litigants is: When File to challenge or such a report? Typically, this involves petitions to , , or seek into the report submitted by the commissioner appointed under of the .
This blog post explores the authority of a to a , drawing from key legal provisions, judicial precedents, and practical insights. Understanding these rules helps parties navigate objections effectively and ensures procedural fairness. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
of the CPC outlines the appointment and powers of commissioners. Specifically:
These provisions grant courts discretion but emphasize that actions must be reasoned. A Munsiff, as the trial court, cannot act arbitrarily.
A Munsiff may the report only if dissatisfied with it, supported by valid reasons. Courts have clarified:
Remittance requires dissatisfaction; it cannot be done without grounds. In , the ruling states a cannot be remitted back without valid reasons. 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 723
The Munsiff has discretion for a fresh commission if the report is unsatisfactory, but it's not mandatory. 1983 0 Supreme(Ker) 63
Before remitting, the court must consider objections. A blanket order setting aside without resolution is invalid, leaving parties unresolved. 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 721
From additional precedents:- Reports can be remitted for further inquiry without setting aside if deficient, promoting efficiency. For instance, A commission report can be remitted for further inquiry without being if it is found to be deficient, ensuring judicial efficiency. 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 970- In one case, the court allowed remittance noting omissions in essentials, directing the same commissioner to supplement without nullifying the prior report. 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 970
Courts stress reasoned exercise of power:
Other cases illustrate practical applications:
Under , allows challenge if the Munsiff errs, but not routinely. Jurisdiction cannot be rejected to decide the suitability of commission report - Aggrieved party can challenge the decree... 2012 0 Supreme(Ker) 285
In property suits, like possession challenges, courts examine reports alongside title documents, refusing remittance without merit. 2016 0 Supreme(Kar) 620
When facing an unsatisfactory report:
If rejected, challenge via revision or , but only for grave errors.
Recommendations:- Thoroughly review reports before objecting.- Ensure applications for remittance specify grounds.- If dissatisfied, request clear orders for inquiry or new commissioner.
In conclusion, while Munsiffs have discretion, it must align with procedural justice. Litigants filing review petitions succeed by demonstrating clear deficiencies, backed by precedents. Always seek professional advice tailored to your suit.
References:2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 723 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 721 1983 0 Supreme(Ker) 63 2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 1335 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 970 2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 28183 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 33503 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 62950 2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 35710 2012 0 Supreme(Ker) 285 2013 0 Supreme(Ker) 1033
#CPCLaw #CommissionerReport #MunsiffCourt
or to remit the Commission report for further enquiry. ... P7 report and P8 sketch are insufficient to elucidate the matter in dispute in the suit, it shall be open to the trial court to remit the report for further inquiry or to appoint a fresh Advocate Commissioner for the said purpose, on appropriate application or otherwise. ... On the basis of Ext.P9 application to set aside Ext.P7 ....
S No. 152 of 2024 passed by the Munsiff Court, Ettumanoor rejecting Ext.P6 application filed by the petitioner/ plaintiff to set aside the expert commission report or remit back the same. ... Order XXVI Rule 10 of the CPC provides that the commission report is ipso facto evidence in the case. When an application is moved to remit the report, the court may examine the Commission....
An Advocate Commissioner and a Surveyor were appointed, who have filed Ext.P3 report and plan. The petitioner has found serious mistakes in Ext.P3. Accordingly, he filed Ext.P4 objection to Ext.P3 report and I.A.No.1022/2019 (Ext.P5) to remit the commission report. ... However, it is further observed that, if there is any discrepancy in the commission report and plan, the same can be put....
Accordingly it was ordered that the report need not be remitted. 3. On the application to remit the Commissioner's Report, the Commissioner was examined on 17.01.2020. ... I am of the opinion that the said deposition of the Commissioner needs to be specifically taken note of and appreciated as to why the commissioner formed such an opinion and as to whether it justifies the petitioner's ....
(ii) When an earlier report suffers from some deficiency, Court if can direct same Commissioner or appoint a fresh Commissioner without setting aside previous report even by Appellate Court? ... Commissioner, without setting aside the previous report to note the details which have been omitted. ... No.64/2013, a commissioner was deputed to note out the essentials for t....
Based on the above inspection, the Advocate Commissioner had filed his report on 20.2.2020. It is long thereafter, that the petitioner had filed Ext P16 objection to the commission report and Ext P14 application, to remit the commission report. ... However, as the Advocate Commissioner was unable to identify and fix the boundary of the property on account of the absence of the survey st....
EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF COMMISSIONER’S REPORT AND DRAWING SUBMITTED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN RCP.NO.77/2021 BEFORE THE RENT CONTROL COURT/MUNSIFF, VATAKARA EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO REMIT COMMISSION REPORT AND PLAN FILED ... Taking exception to the findings of the Advocate Commissioner in the above report, the petitioner-tenant filed I.A.No.4 of 2024 t....
AND PLAN OF THE COMMISSIONER. ... EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS IN I.A.NO.3357/2015 IN O.S.NO.270/2004, ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPALAM TO REMIT EXHIBIT P5 REPORT COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND PLAN.
It is seen that the Commissioner has filed a detailed report as Ext.P2, against which the petitioner filed Ext.P3 report, pointing out various discrepancies in the report. Along with the report, an application was also filed to remit the same. ... Thereafter, the Commissioner and Surveyor were directed to measure the property and file a report. Ext.P2 ....
The commissioner filed the report along with the survey plan. The petitioners filed an application to remit back the commissioner's report. ... NO. 125/2016 ON THE FILES OF COURT OF THE MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE, MANNARKAD Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF IN THE APPLICATION TO REMIT THE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND PLAN Exhibit P7 T....
He has admitted about the appointment of the Commissioner in Munsiff Court and about the submitting the report as per Ex. He says that, he does not know the measurements of the property of Varadaraja Modaliyar.
Therefore, suomoto enquiry was started under Section 77(1)(c) by the Deputy Commissioner, Kakinada in O.A. In pursuance of the order of this Court, the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Kakinada, continued inquiry in O.A. No.350 of 1973 and after issuing notice to the hereditary trustee, the plaintiff filed Writ Petition No.6516 of 1973, challenging the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner and sought for a direction restraining the Deputy Commissioner from proceeding with ....
(k) The power is discretionary and has to be exercised on equitable principle. (m) The object of superintendence, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. In an appropriate case, the power can be exercise suomoto. (l) On a proper appreciation of the wide and unfettered power of the High Court under Article 227, it transpires that the ....
Appointment of the Advocate Commissioner though at the instance of the appellants being for identification of the suit property enure to the benefit of the respondents also. They could remit the batta ordered by the learned Munsiff. Respondents filed application to permit them pay the batta ordered by the learned Munsiff (on the application for commission preferred by the appellants). They attempted at that and filed application to permit them pay the batta but the learned Mu....
The learned Munsiff, finding no reason to set aside or remit the report, turned down the objections raised by the petitioner/2nd defendant vide Ext.P5 order. Correctness of that order is assailed in this original petition invoking the visitorial jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In the enquiry that proceeded on such objections, the advocate commissioner and also the petitioner were examined.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
