Radha Krishna Jha vs Saryug Sahu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.693 of 2019
CNR No. BRHC010370722019
======================================================
Radha Krishna Jha Son of Late Jay Narayan Jha Resident of Village-
Ghoghardiha, P.S.-Ghoghardiha, District-Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Saryug Sahu Son of Late Kalar Sahu Resident of Village-Brahmapura, P.S.-
Phulparas, District-Madhubani
2. Sarban Kumar Choudhary Son of Late Ramvilash Choudhary Resident of
village-Ghoghardiha, P.S.-Ghoghardiha, District-Madhubani
3. Ram Krishna Mishra Son of late Niru Mishra Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
4. Dev Krishna Mishra Son of late Niru Mishra Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
5. Jay Krishna Mishra Son of Sristi Narayan Mishra Resident of Village and
P.O. and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
6. Narayan Mishra Son of Sristi Narayan Mishra Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
7. Jibachh Mishra Son of Sristi Narayan Mishra Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
8. Hari Krishna Jha Son of Late Jay Narayan Jha Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S. Ghoghardiha, Distt- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman, Advocate
For the Rest No. 1 : Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-11-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.693 of 2019 dt.03-11-2026
2/4
2. The present petition has been filed for setting aside
the impugned order dated 12.03.2019 passed in Title Suit No. 4 of
2020 by the learned Munsif, Jhanjharpur whereby and whereunder
the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for appointment of
survey knowing pleader commissioner has been rejected.
4. Perused the record.
5. From perusal of the record, I find that the
petitioner/plaintiff filed an application for appointment of survey
knowing pleader commissioner in a case where declaration and
confirmation of possession has been sought in the title suit. The
petitioner/plaintiff claimed that defendant claimed a separate block
of 12 dhurs 8 kanwa land in the suit property whereas the
petitioner/plaintiff claimed the land to be in one block and,
therefore, to elucidate the matter appointment of survey knowing
pleader commissioner was necessary.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
impugned order could not be sustained as learned trial Court
rejected the prayer of the petitioner for appointment of survey
knowing pleader commissioner only on the ground that the matter
was at its fag end and argument of defendants was concluded and
it was fixed for argument of the petitioner/plaintiff and the
application seems to be filed for lingering the matter.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.693 of 2019 dt.03-11-2026
3/4
7. It is settled law that the survey knowing pleader
commissioner could not be appointed to gather evidence on behalf
of any party. Whatever might be the claim of the
petitioner/plaintiff, he could have agitated the same at the time of
adducing evidence. Moreover, to show the nature of land or to
buttress his claim over the suit land, it is for the petitioner/plaintiff
to bring on record the cogent evidence. Petitioner/plaintiff can not
seek indulgence of the Court for allowing it to gather evidence
about the nature of land or the possession over the same by
appointment of survey knowing pleader commissioner. There
appears no necessity for appointment of the survey knowing
pleader commissioner when the parties have already concluded
their evidence and the matter was fixed for argument and only
judgment is to be pronounced.
8. Therefore, having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case made hereinbefore, I do not find any
infirmity in the impugned order dated 12.03.2019 passed in Title
Suit No. 4 of 2020 by the learned Munsif, Jhanjharpur and, hence,
the present petition is dismissed.
9. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial
and after concluding the argument pass the judgment at the earliest
considering the fact that the suit is of the year 2000 and the matter

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.693 of 2019 dt.03-11-2026
4/4
has been pending at the stage of argument in the year 2019 when
the present petition was filed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Vikash/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date