Punjab And Haryana High Court Uses ChatGPT To Understand DGPS In Property Dispute Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Leverages AI and DGPS for Precision in Property Dispute Resolution

 

In a groundbreaking move to modernize judicial processes, the Punjab and Haryana High Court sought assistance from artificial intelligence, specifically ChatGPT, to evaluate the efficacy of Differential GPS (DGPS) technology in resolving a property dispute. Justice Deepak Gupta delivered the judgment, emphasizing the critical role of DGPS in ensuring accuracy and fairness in property demarcation.

 

Case Overview

 

The dispute, Kuldeep Kumar Sharma v. Randeep Rana (CR No. 3077 of 2023), originated from a 2017 decree granting specific performance of an agreement to sell a property in Karnal, which included a showroom and a plot outlined in a site plan. Despite multiple surveys, the judgment debtor, Kuldeep Kumar Sharma, consistently raised objections to the demarcation of the property, delaying its resolution.

 

Key Legal Questions

 

1. Accuracy of Property Demarcation: Could DGPS technology, used in the third survey, provide reliable and precise measurements for legal purposes?

 

 

2. Examination of Survey Officials: Should the Naib Tehsildar and Junior Engineer who conducted the DGPS survey be cross-examined regarding its methodology?

 

 

 

Court’s Observations

 

Justice Deepak Gupta consulted ChatGPT to understand DGPS technology and its application. The AI explained that DGPS offers centimeter-level accuracy by correcting satellite signal errors in real-time. It highlighted the following benefits:

 

High Precision: Provides real-time, highly accurate location data.

 

Alignment with Official Records: Ensures consistency with cadastral maps and government documents.

 

Time and Cost Efficiency: Speeds up the demarcation process compared to traditional methods.

 

 

The court remarked, “The DGPS system, with its ability to achieve centimeter-level accuracy, must replace outdated manual methods of property demarcation to enhance precision and efficiency.”

 

Decision

 

The court dismissed the petitioner’s plea, citing repeated delays in the execution of the 2017 decree. It noted the minimal variation in measurements across the three surveys—483, 483.23, and 483.10 square yards—highlighting DGPS’s reliability.

 

Justice Gupta rejected the demand to examine the Local Commissioner and Junior Engineer, affirming that their reports adhered to modern standards and were credible. The respondent’s willingness to accept even the maximum measurement further validated the fairness of the process.

 

Significance of the Judgment

 

This decision underscores the judiciary's readiness to integrate cutting-edge technology like DGPS for more precise and efficient resolution of property disputes. By embracing AI and modern tools, the court has set a precedent for transitioning from outdated manual methods to data-driven solutions, ensuring justice is served with accuracy and fairness.