RACHNA PROTHI vs RAGHAV GOEL & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 03rd July, 2025 + CM(M) 3846/2024 & CM APPL. 67217/2024 RACHNA PROTHI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. N.K. Kantawala, Mr. Satyender Chahar, Mr. A.M. Nair & Mr. Nimish, Advs. versus RAGHAV GOEL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Akhil Mittal, Ms. Tamanna Agarwal & Mr. Vineet Kumar Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The challenge in the present petition is with respect to dismissal of the application moved by the petitioner dated 29.10.2024. 2. Petitioner is plaintiff before the learned Trial Court and has filed a suit for mandatory and perpetual injunction. The suit is already at the stage of final arguments and the evidence has already been led by the respective parties. 3. The petitioner/plaintiff, however, moved an application under Order XXVI Rule 10-A read with Order XVII Rule 18 read with Section 151 CPC seeking appointment of Local Commissioner for scientific investigation. The prayer, in the abovesaid application was to the effect that a Local Commissioner be appointed to conduct scientific investigation to determine the age of the partition wall in question. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 3846/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:05.07.2025 12:18:44 4. I have heard Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhil Mittal, learned counsel for the respondents. 5. According to Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, need has arisen in view of a specific issue, which has been framed by the learned Trial Court. Such issue i.e. issue No.6A reads as under: “6A. Whether the partition wall as shown in sanctioned building was built later on or not? OPP” 6. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, learned Senior Counsel for pet