Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 16411 Mad
Judgement Date : 14 October, 2022
C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
and
C.M.P.No.17506 of 2022
S.Boobalan ... Petitioner
vs
1.M/s.Muthurajakula Dharmaparipalana Karys Committee,
Represented by its Secretary – Mr.B.K.Padmanaban,
Sri Thirumangai Alwar Mandabam,
No.17A, T.K.Nambi Street,
Little Kancheepuram.
2.B.K.Padmanaban
3.Sridhar ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree in I.A.No.4 of 2021 in
O.S.No.74 of 2020 dated 20.07.2022 passed by the learned Additional
District Munsif at Kancheepuram and allow this Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ezhilraj
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the
Court below dismissing the petition for appointment of Advocate
Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit property.
2. The petitioner herein filed a suit for bare injunction in O.S.No.74 of
2020 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Kancheepuram by
asserting his possession. Now, the petitioner filed the present application for
appointment of Advocate Commissioner stating that the
respondents/defendants are attempting to takeaway the valuables kept by him
in the first floor of the suit property. The petitioner herein filed the suit for
bare injunction by asserting his possession over the suit property.
3. According to the petitioner, he is in possession of the suit property, if
that be so, it may not be possible for the respondents to enter the suit property
and takeaway the movables kept by the petitioner in the first floor of the suit
property.
4. Having regard to the pleadings raised by the revision petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
asserting his possession over the suit property, the appointment of the
Advocate Commissioner is not at all necessary. It is settled law that the
Advocate Commissioner cannot give any finding with regard to the physical
possession of the parties and the legal possession has to be ascertain by the
Court based on the evidence available on record.
5. It is open to the petitioner to prove his legal possession and
entitlement to remain in the suit property by adducing other evidence.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
14.10.2022
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
dm
To
The Additional District Munsif,
Kancheepuram.
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
dm
C.R.P.No.3294 of 2022
14.10.2022
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!