A.M.Tamizhvaanan v. the State of Tamilnadu
Case brief
What is this about?
This court, hearing a Civil Revision Petition challenging orders on a suit regarding an obstructed pathway, closed the revision petition without deciding the merits on the ground that an Advocate Commissioner's report was already available. The court directed the registry to forward the report to the lower court for further proceedings. The Commissioner was awarded additional remuneration by the p
What did the court decide?
The revision petition closed; Advocate Commissioner's report to be forwarded to District Munsif Court; Commissioner awarded Rs. 15,000 by petitioner.
What the court decided
CRP No. 2842 of 2022
CRP No.2842 of 2022
K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
This matter is posted today before this Court under the caption “For Being Mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner bringing to the notice of this Court that the name of the Court before which the suit is pending and the number of the suit had been wrongly given. Apart from that, he would also submit that the Advocate Commissioner has found the pathway has been obstructed and therefore, he may be given opportunity to make necessary amendments in the suit.
2. In view of the same, the following corrections shall be carried out order dated 11.03.2026:
(i) In Para 6 at line No.4 the name of the Court namely, learned Subordinate Judge, Mettur shall be modified as learned District Munsif Court, Mettur and;
(ii) In the same paragraph at line No.6, it has been wrongly mentioned as I.A.No.154 of 2019, instead of O.S.No.154 of 2019 and the same shall also be rectified.
3. In addition to the above corrections, at the end of paragraph No.6, the following line shall be added: “after giving an opportunity to the plaintiff to make necessary amendments in the suit.”
__________ Page1 of 2
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petition challenging the orders of the Sub-Court and District Munsif Court should be decided on merits given the existence of an Advocate Commissioner's report.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A.M.Tamizhvaanan
- respondent
The State of Tamilnadu Represented by its District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Salem
- respondent
The Chief Educational Officer, Chief Education Office, District Collectorate Office Building, Salem
- respondent
The Head Master Government Model Higher Secondary School, Avadathur Village, Sowriyur Post, Jalagantapuram Via, Metture Taluk, Salem District
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court