Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 13857 Mad
Judgement Date : 12 July, 2021
C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018
and C.M.P.No.16235 of 2018
A.Parasuraman ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. R.Pitchandi
2. R.Tamilarasan ... Respondents
Prayer :- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India to set aside the order passed on 06.06.2018 in
I.A.No.924 of 2016 in O.S.No.190 of 2013 on the file of the learned
Additional District Munsif, Vellore and allow the I.A.No.924 of 2016 as
prayed for.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Lakshminarayanan
For Respondents : Ms.D.Chitra Maragatham
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is directed as against the fair and
decreetal order dated 06.06.2018 passed by the learned Additional District
Munsif, Vellore, in I.A.No.924 of 2016 in O.S.No.190 of 2013, thereby
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018
dismissing the petition for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner.
2. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the
defendants. The petitioner filed suit in O.S.No.190 of 2013 for mandatory
injunction, permanent injunction and also for declaration in respect of the
suit property. While pending the suit, the petitioner filed petition in
I.A.No.924 of 2016 for seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner
to inspect the suit property with the help of the Surveyor and measure the
same. The trial Court dismissed the said petition as against which, the
present Civil Revision Petition.
3. It is seen from records the petitioner already filed petition for
appointment of an Advocate Commissioner in I.A.No.934 of 2013 and the
same was dismissed on 18.11.2013. As against the said order, the petitioner
did not prefer any Civil Revision Petition. In fact, the petitioner filed
another suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction in
O.S.No.413 of 2004 and the same was dismissed by the judgment and
decree dated 16.02.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018
appeal in A.S.No.42 of 2009 and the same was dismissed. In that appeal suit
also, the petitioner had filed an application seeking appointment of an
Advocate Commissioner and the same was also dismissed. Therefore, the
petitioner repeatedly filed petition seeking appointment of an Advocate
Commissioner to drag the proceedings and nothing else. That apart,
appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is nothing but collection of
evidence and therefore the trial Court rightly dismissed the petition. This
Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Court below.
4. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no
order as to cost.
12.07.2021 Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order
rts
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
rts
To
1. The Additional District Munsif, Vellore.
2. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
C.R.P.(PD)No.2440 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.16235 of 2018
12.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!