In Brief
A property dispute arose when the defendant was alleged to have encroached on land purchased by the plaintiff for 852-1/3 sq. yards. The trial court decreed in favour of the plaintiff. On appeal, the First Appellate Court reversed this, relying on a Local Commissioner's report showing the plaintiff in possession of 955 sq. yards, not the amount purchased. The High Court reversed again, criticizing the Commissioner's process. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred: the issues were purely factual, not legal, and the unchallenged Commissioner's report could not be contradicted by oral testimony. The appeal was allowed, restoring the First Appellate Court's judgment and dismissing the plaintiff's suit."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.