Sr. No. 07 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CR No. 42/2024 Subash Singh and Ors. …. Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through:- Ms. Rozina Afzal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Ishrat Bukhari, Advocate. V/s Darbari Lal & Ors. …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate. CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 14.07.2026 1. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have agreed that learned trial Court be requested to expedite the proceedings in the suit as both the parties have filed their respective applications seeking amendment of the replica as well as the written statement, as the case may be. 2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for contesting respondent Nos. 1 to 5 submits that during the pendency of the suit, the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Munsiff, Hiranagar has passed an order under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for local inspection of the suit property. 3. Though that order is not subject matter of challenge in the present proceedings but this Court deems it proper to bring it to the notice of learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Munsiff, Hirnagar that he should not have resorted to order 26 Rule 9 CPC at this stage particularly when the issues have not been framed and the parties have not led the evidence. It is only when the parties have led the evidence that the trial Court can CR No. 42/2024 2 issue commission for elucidating any matter in controversy in terms of Order 26 Rule 9 CPC. 4. Be that as it may, learned trial Court shall not consider the repot of the Commissioner at this stage and keep the same in sealed cover to be considered subsequently in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of by requesting the learned trial Court to expedite the proceedings and decide the applications preferred by the contesting parties for amendment of their respective pleadings as expeditiously as possible. (Rajnesh Oswal) Judge JAMMU 14.07.2026. Neha-1 Neha Kumari 2026.07.15 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document