Court commissioner can be appointed after judgement reserved: Karnataka High Court

The high court has said that in cases concerning property/land disputes, the civil court can appoint a court /local commissioner even after the matter is reserved for judgement. “Under Rule (9) Order XXVI of Civil Procedure Code a commissioner can be appointed at the discretion of the court suo motto and merely because such a court commissioner is appointed after the matter is reserved for judgement would not make such appointment bad in law,” Justice Suraj Govindaraj said.

The case at hand pertains to a civil suit filed before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol for possession of a portion of property alleging that the defendant had encroached upon it. After the evidence, the cross-examination of witnesses by the parties, the matter was reserved for judgement.

At this stage, on July 22, 2024, the court appointed the Panchayat Development Officer (PDO) of Laxanatti village panchayat as the Court Commissioner to submit a report. The court held that it was necessary to appoint a court commissioner for local investigation of suit properties for the purpose of better appreciation of evidence and effective adjudication of the dispute.

Challenging this, it was contended that once the matter had been posted for judgement, the question of appointment of Court Commissioner would not arise and would amount to reopening of the stage of the case. It was further argued that such appointments after reserving for judgement goes against the intent of amendment to CPC, to speed up the proceedings.

The court noted that the civil court was of the opinion that a Commissioner was required to be appointed to carry out local inspection of the properties for a better appreciation of the evidence and effective adjudication on the dispute. 

“A perusal of a reading of the Order XXVI rule 9 of Code of Civil Procedure would indicate that in any suit where the Court determines a  local investigation to be requisite, then such a local Commissioner could be appointed by the Court appointing a Commissioner. The fact that the words used are “the Court deems a local investigation to be requisite or proper”, gives ample discretion to the Court to decide whether a Court Commissioner is to be appointed or not. This power of the Court is not restricted by any application to be filed by any of the parties but, it is sufficient if the Court deems fit that would mean that even suo-moto power under Rule (9) Order XXVI of CPC can be exercised,” Justice Suraj Govindaraj said.