Rajasthan High Court
CW/19066/2024 of RAJENDRA KUMAR PARNAMI S/O LATE SHRI PARMANAND PARNAMI Vs TRILOCHAN SINGH S/O LATE SHRI MAHENDRA SINGH on 3 July 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19066/2024 URN: CW / 40068U / 2024 Rajendra Kumar Parnami S/o Late Shri Parmanand Parnami, Aged About 76 Years, R/o Plot No. 207, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan. ----Petitioner/Plaintiff Versus Trilochan Singh S/o Late Shri
[2026:RJ-JP:24758]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19066/2024
URN: CW / 40068U / 2024
Rajendra Kumar Parnami S/o Late Shri Parmanand Parnami, Aged About 76 Years, R/o Plot No. 207, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Petitioner/Plaintiff
Versus
Trilochan Singh S/o Late Shri Mahendra Singh, Aged About 76
Years, R/o Plot No. 206, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondent/Defendant
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. P.K. Mishra
For Respondent(s)
:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
03/07/2026
1. This writ petition has been listed in the ‘Orders’ category for the reason that notices upon respondent could not be served due to want of complete and correct address.
2. The issue involved in this writ petition is respect of appointment of Site Inspection Commissioner by the Court, hence, considering the issue involved, writ petition has been heard finally on merits, at this stage itself.
3. It appears that petitioner made a prayer for appointment of Court Commissioner for site inspection of the suit property, stating inter alia that despite passing of an interim injunction order dated 21.12.2023, respondent is continuing illegal construction over the suit property.
[2026:RJ-JP:24758] (2 of 2) [CW-19066/2024]
3. For this purpose, petitioner had filed an application dated 05.04.2024 (Annexure-2), which was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 30.05.2024. The order dated 30.05.2024 was not challenged and petitioner filed another application for the same purpose and prayer, which has also been dismissed by the trial Court vide order impugned dated 12.11.2024.
4. Learned trial Court in the order impugned dated 12.11.2024 has assigned the reasons that through appointment of Commissioner by the Court, petitioner/plaintiff may not be allowed to collect evidence by seeking assistance of Court Commissioner and further previous application of similar relief has already been dismissed on merits vide order dated 30.05.2024.
5. Having heard counsel for petitioner and from perusal of record including the previous order dated 30.05.2024, this Court does not find any manifest illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order dated 12.11.2024 warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
6. With aforesaid observations, instant writ petition is hereby dismissed.
7. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J 18/NITIN