# of the case and take up such matters as per routine of the Court

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 22/VIII
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1949-03-18
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 22/VIII
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/of-the-case-and-take-up-such-matters-as-per-routine-of-the-court-163155
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

155
wherein no stay order has been passed by any Superior Court staying further proceedings
of the case and take up such matters as per routine of the Court.
5.
COMMISSIONS
(i)
Inland
C.L. No. 22/VIII h-13 dated 18th March, 1949

Immediately after the issues have been struck the presiding officer should
consider, may be on an application by a party, if the preparation of a site plan or enquiry
after local inspection at the spot is necessary for the proper decision of the case. The
commission should as far as possible, be issued on that very day with clear and detailed
directions to be recorded in the Judge's notes, as to what the commissioner is required to
show in the plan and on what points he is required to make a specific report. If any
witness is to be examined on commission the court may consider the issue of a
commission then and not postpone it till after the recording of the entire oral evidence.
C.L. No. 35/VIII-b-23 dated 15 March, 1971

Presiding Officers should mention the name of the commissioner at the time of
passing order of issuing commission.
Second commission
G.L. No. 19/67 dated 1st May, 1929
 A second commission should not be issued until good reasons are given why the
first commission should not be accepted. When once a second commission is issued the
first commission goes out of evidence entirely. No reference can afterwards be made to
that first commission. If second commission is also found to be unsatisfactory reasons
should be given and that commission should also be taken out of the evidence. The
attention of judicial officers is drawn to the relevant passages from I.L.R. XLV Mad. 79
(Judgment in S.A. no 671 of 1919 between K.K.M., Thottama and C.S. Subramanian).
Distribution of commissions
G.L. No. 4386/89 dated 4th December, 1922

The attention of District Judges is drawn to the necessity of ascertaining
periodically the number of commissions issued to legal practitioners in each court
subordinate to them and sees that there is a fair distribution of such work. The court
regards this supervision as most important.
C.L. No. 102/411-h-3 dated 2nd December, 1968
Strict compliance of Rule 65(4), General Rules (Civil) may be impressed upon the
presiding officers so that commissions for preparation of a map or for making partition
are ordinarily issued to Amins only in the first instance.
Timely execution of commissions
C.L. No. 110/VIII b-28 dated 24th October 1952
Presiding officers should be strict in demanding execution of commissions in time
and in case a commissioner is found to be dilatory or his work is generally found to be
156
unsatisfactory the question of omitting his name from the next year's list should be
considered.

Complete directions should always be given to the commissioner at the time of
issuing the commission.
C.L. No. 52 dated 5th May, 1972

Names of only those persons should be entered in the list of survey
commissioners under rule 66(1) General Rules (Civil) who possess a good knowledge of
survey work and can make measurements properly. There should be no hesitation on the
part of the presiding officers in recommending the removal of the name of a survey
commission satisfactorily. In case survey cannot be done by the advocates or the Amins,
there should be no hesitation in issuing the commission to a qualified person even though
his name is not on the list.
Examination of transferred Medical Officers
G.L. No. 19/48-75 (a) dated 20th June 1931 read with
G.O. No. 2470/VI dated 20th June, 1931

A medical officer who has been transferred to another district should not as a
matter of course be re-called to give evidence in his old district, but should be examined
on commission unless his personal appearance is considered absolutely necessary.
Examination of Finger-Print expert
C.L. No. 121/VIII-f-8 dated 8th December, 1951 read with
C.L. No. 9 dated 24th May, 1909
Delay in the execution of commission for the examination of finger- print expert
is generally caused by-
(a)
the treasury chalan showing that the party concerned has deposited the fee
of the expert, not reaching the Lucknow Court in time:
(b)
The amount deposited being less than that prescribed under paragraph
82(b) (8) of the U.P. Finger and Foot Print Manual.
(c)
The Commissioner's fee not reaching the Lucknow Court in time: or
(d)
The interrogatories not being sent along with other papers for the
execution of the commission
In order to obviate such delays while issuing such commission the presiding
officer should see that the Commissioner's fee and the treasury challan relating to the
deposit of the expert's fee reach the court to which the commission is issued for
execution in good time. In a case in which an open commission is not issued the court
issuing the commission should also take care to forward the interrogatories and the cross-
interrogatories if any, along with the other papers.
An additional sum of Rs. 3 should also be sent along with the commission to meet
the conveyance charges of the commissioner in addition to his fee as prescribed under
rule 66 (4) Chapter III of General Rules (Civil), 1957. An extract from Government
notification no. I/III-B-79-49, dated the 23rd May, 1949 prescribing fees for the