Madras High Court allowed a civil revision petition against the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. The single-judge bench held that land extent issues must be decided via oral and documentary evidence, not boundary measurement by a commissioner.
Civil revision petition allowed; connected miscellaneous petition closed. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.03.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
C.R.P(MD)No.768 of 2014 (PD) and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014
1.Thangavelu 2.Malhothra 3.Masco .. Petitioners / Respondents 1 to 3 / Defendants 1 to 3 Vs. 1.Thangarajan (died) .. 1st respondent / Petitioner / Plaintiff
2.The District Collector, Court Road, Thanjavur.
3.The Revenue Division Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Pattukkottai. 4.The Thasildhar, Taluk Office, Pattukottai. .. Respondents 2 to 4/ Respondents 4 to 6 / Defendants 4 to 6
5.S.Sivapackiyam
6.Ilango
7.Geetha 8.Latha .. Respondents 5 to 8
(R2 to R4 are not necessary parties in the revision and hence, notice on them is dispensed with)
(R5 to 8 brought on record as LRs of the deceased 1st respondent, vide order of this Court dated 18.08.2016, in C.M.P.(MD).No.7338 of 2016 in C.R.P.(MD).No.768 of 2014.)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ order of the learned District Munsif, Pattukottai in I.A.No.554 of 2013 in O.S.No.182 of 2013, dated 07.01.2014.
2
For petitioners : Mr.H.Arumugam For respondents 5 to 8 : Mr.N.Balakrishnan
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed by the revision petitioners / defendants as against the order passed by the Court below appointing an Advocate Commissioner to measure the suit property.
2.The first respondent has filed the suit in O.S.No.182 of 2013 for declaration and permanent injunction. The suit property originally belonged to the first revision petitioner / 1st defendant and he alienated the suit property by way of a registered sale deed dated 06.06.1983 in favour of one Natarajan, who in turn sold the same in favour of the first respondent / plaintiff by way of a registered sale deed dated 09.12.1983. According to the first revision petitioner / 1st defendant, out of 22 cents of land in S.No.199/9, he had sold only two cents of land in favour of the said Natarajan for discharge of his liability to repay the hand loan and the revision petitioner / 1st defendant has been in possession and enjoyment of the remaining land. According to the first respondent / plaintiff, though his predecessor in title viz., Natarajan has purchased 22 cents by way of registered sale deed dated 06.06.1983 and he has alienated the same in his favour by way of registered sale deed, dated 09.12.1983, in both the said sale deeds, the description of the property has been wrongly mentioned as 2 cents out of 22 cents in S.No.199/9 and 24 cents in S.No.199/5, instead of 22 cents in S.No.199/9. But, the four boundaries are correctly mentioned in the said sale deeds. While so, the first respondent / plaintiff has filed I.A.No.554 of 2013 seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure the suit property by correlating the title document and parent document of the 1st respondent / plaintiff viz., sale deeds dated 06.06.1983 and 09.12.1983. The Court below has ordered the said application and appointed an Advocate Commissioner holding that it will be helpful for the Court to decide the dispute. Aggrieved by that order, the respondents 1 to 3 / defendants have filed this civil revision petition.
3
appointed an Advocate Commissioner to measure the suit property based on the said sale deeds.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(RTI)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The District Munsif, Pattukkottai.
2.The Record Keeper,
V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (2 COPIES)
+1cc to Mr.N.BALAKRISHNAN, Advocate, SR.No.52552 +1cc to Mr.H.ARUMUGAM,Advocate, SR.No. 52781
C.R.P(MD)No.768 of 2014 (PD) 02.03.2018
GCG
KK/KKR/05.04.2018/SAR-1/3P-6C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the issue of land extent conveyed in sale deeds can be decided by appointing an Advocate Commissioner.
Whether appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure suit property is permissible without oral and documentary evidence.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Thangavelu
Malhothra
Masco
Thangarajan (deceased)
District Collector, Court Road, Thanjavur
Revenue Division Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Pattukkottai
J. Nisha Banu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
