Sumathi vs S.Ramakrishnan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6995 Mad

                                                                              C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 04.04.2022

                                                         CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU

                                               C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015
                                                 and M.P.No.1 of 2015


                     Alamelu (Died)

                     Sumathi                                                  ... Petitioner
                                                            Vs.

                     S.Ramakrishnan                                           ... Respondent

                     PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
                     India to set aside the order passed by the learned District Munsif Court, at
                     Jeyankondam made in I.A.No.869 of 2013 in O.S.No.73 of 2007 dated
                     08.04.2014 and further direct the trial Court to reissue warrant for
                     appointing the advocate commissioner along with qualified surveyor in the
                     subject matter of the suit property.


                                    For Petitioner           :    Mr.D.Veerasekaran

                                    For Respondent           :    Mr.M.R.Elavarasan
                                                                  for M/s.K.Balu




                     Page NO:1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015



                                                       O R D E R.
                                   This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order

                     passed by the learned District Munsif Court, at Jeyankondam made in

                     I.A.No.869 of 2013 in O.S.No.73 of 2007 dated 08.04.2014 and further

                     direct the trial Court to reissue warrant for appointing the advocate

                     commissioner along with qualified surveyor in the subject matter of the suit

                     property.



                                   2. It is the case of the petitioner that one Mrs.Kannagi,

                     Advocate, was appointed as Advocate Commissioner by the trial Court to lo­

                     cate, measure and prepare a rough sketch of the suit properties and submit a

                     report.      However, since      the report filed by the said Advocate

                     Commissioner had some defects, the petitioner filed I.A.No.869 of 2013 in

                     O.S.No.73 of 2007 to re-issue the warrant and appoint a Senior Advocate as

                     Commissioner to identify, locate, measure and prepare a rough sketch of the

                     suit properties and submit a report in this regard.




                     Page NO:2/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015




                                  3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the

                     judgment reported in 2014 (1) TNLJ 484, wherein, it is clearly indicated

                     that "if there is any doubt about the area of land identification or location

                     of an object then local investigation is necessary" and therefore, he would

                     pray for appointing commissioner along with the surveyor, which was

                     dismissed by the Court below vide order dated 08.04.2014 in I.A.No.869 of

                     2013 in O.S.No.73 of 2007. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the peti­

                     tioner has preferred the present Civil Revision Petition.



                                  4. The learned counsel for the respondent has no objection for

                     allowing this petition for appointing an Advocate Commissioner along with

                     the Surveyor.



                                  5. In view of the ratio laid in the judgment reported in

                     2014 (1) TNLJ 484 and the fact that the learned counsel for the respondent

                     has also got no objection for appointing an Advocate Commissioner along

                     with qualified Surveyor, this Court directs the learned Judge for issuance of


                     Page NO:3/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015

                     warrant to the Advocate Commissioner, along with Surveyor and to file a

                     final report within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy

                     of this order. The learned Judge may take into consideration and re-issue

                     the warrant to the same Advocate Commissioner, Mrs.Kannagi, and the

                     property may be inspected along with local Surveyor.


                                  6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed.

                     No Costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.



                                                                                       04.04.2022
                     ab/msv

                     Note: Issue order copy on or before 11.04.2022.


                     To

                     The District Munsif Court, Jeyankondam




                     Page NO:4/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                          C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015




                                          J.NISHA BANU,J.

msv

C.R.P.PD.No.1415 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

04.04.2022

Page NO:5/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis