Held that a suit for injunction claiming possession requires independent oral and documentary evidence, not proof by a commissioner. Dismissed the civil revision petition challenging the trial court's refusal to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to note physical features.
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.
C.R.P.No.1129 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
CRP.No.1129 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.5856 of 2024
M.Shivakumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.M.Vijayakumar 2.V.Kanchana 3.V.Ganasekar
4.M.Arulkumar
...Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order made in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in O.S.No.6 of 2023 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif Court dated 20.07.2023.
For Petitioner :M/s.M.R.Thangavel
1/4
C.R.P.No.1129 of 2024
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the
Trial Court dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit property.
C.R.P.No.1129 of 2024
evidence. The Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed to ascertain the fact by possession. Therefore, the Trial Court rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features. I do not find any error in the order impugned in this revision. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
26.03.2024
Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No nr To The Additional District Munsif Court, Vellore.
S.SOUNTHAR , J.
3/4
C.R.P.No.1129 of 2024
nr
CRP.No.1129 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.5856 of 2024
26.03.2024
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court correctly dismissed the application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note physical features based on the requirement of independent proof of possession.
What is the legal basis for dismissing an application to appoint a commissioner when possession must be proved by independent evidence?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Shivakumar
M.Vijayakumar
V.Kanchana
V.Ganasekar
M.Arulkumar
S.Sounthar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
