The High Court of Madras dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an order appointing an advocate commissioner to measure a compound wall. The court held no irregularity existed as the appointment was necessary for inspection in a suit regarding encroachment.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed; connected miscellaneous petition closed.
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.
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
and
CMP.No.746 of 2018
1.Zubaida Wahab
2.Sarah Wahab ..Petitioners
Vs.
Dr.Najma Ghouse
Represented by her Power Agent
M/s.Skyline Fuondations (P) Ltd.,
Represented by its Managing Director,
Mohamed Qadeer Ahmed,
No.87, Lloyds Road, Royapettah,
Chennai-600 014 ..Respondent
PRAYER:
The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India against the fair and decretal order passed in
IA.No.5654 of 2017 in OS.No.3143 of 2016 dated 13.09.2017 pending
on the file of the XIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.
1/4
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
For Petitioners : Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan
For Respondent : Mr.G.R.M.Palaniappan
ORDER
This civil revision petition is filed against the fair and decretal order passed in IA.No.5654 of 2017 in OS.No.3143 of 2016 dated 13.09.2017 pending on the file of the XIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai, thereby appointed advocate commissioner to inspect the suit schedule property.
respondent is the plaintiff. The respondent filed suit for permanent injunction and also mandatory injunction directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorised encroachment in the form of a wall and a watchman shed being put up by them in the common passage. While pending the suit, the respondent filed petition for appointment of advocate commissioner to measure the eastern side compound wall of the petitioners' property.
petition for appointment of advocate commissioner revealed that the suit property is the common passage and it is situated on the western 2/4
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
side of the respondent's property and from the boundaries of the respondent's property. The suit property is situated at western side. Further revealed that the petitioners herein have extended about 10 feet compound wall on the eastern side of their property and western side of the respondent's property which is the obstruction for entering into the respondent's property. There is also a shed obstructing the ingress and egress of the respondent into and out of the property respectively. Therefore, the respondent filed petition for appointment of advocate commissioner to measure the eastern side compound wall of the petitioners' property. It would not amount to collection of evidence and the trial court rightly allowed the petition. As such this Court finds no irregularity or infirmity in the order passed by the court below.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No order as to costs.
08.04.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No lok
3/4
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
lok
To
The XIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai
CRP.PD.No.145 of 2018
08.04.2021
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of advocate commissioner to measure the compound wall amounted to collection of evidence rendering the order erroneous.
Whether the Civil Revision Petitioner has demonstrated any irregularity or infirmity in the impugned order.
Zubaida Wahab
Sarah Wahab
Dr.Najma Ghouse
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
