This is a civil revision petition challenging the dismissal of an application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note physical features of suit property. The court upheld the trial court's decision that such features are irrelevant for a permanent injunction suit.
The civil revision petition was dismissed with no costs awarded.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5494 of 2015
Date:18.12.2015
Between :
Akkim Ramanjineyulu S/o Akkim Anjinappa R/o S C Colony, Bathalapalli village and mandal
Anantapuram
… Petitioners
And
Pittu Nagendra S/o Subbarayudu R/o Bathalapalli village and mandal Anantapuram
… Respondents
The Court made the following:
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5494 of 2015
ORDER:
Petitioner is defendant in O.S. 49 of 2013 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram. Petitioner filed I A No. 398 of 2015 under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to visit the suit schedule property, to note the hut, shed, existing foundation and such other physical features and file report along with plan. The I.A. was dismissed by order dated 9.11.2015. Aggrieved thereby this revision is filed.
2 Learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance on decision of this Court in MALAMPATI KOTESWARA RAO Vs BANK OF BARODA, NADENDLA BRANCH. In the said case, defendant therein filed interlocutory application seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner and having regard to the facts of the said case, trial Court granted the relief as prayer for. On revision filed before this Court, having regard to the peculiar facts of the case this Court while upholding the
decision of the trial Court, with slight modification, disposed of the said revision.
3 The trial Court on detailed consideration of the matter and following the decision of this Court in ARREDLA RAMA REDDY Vs ARREDLA ALIVELAMMA, dismissed the instant interlocutory application. The trial Court found that suit is filed for permanent injunction and petition is filed by defendant seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner to note down the basement and hut constructed to prove his possession over the suit property. The trial Court held that the suit is filed for perpetual injunction and the claim for perpetual injunction is based on position as obtaining at the time of institution of the suit and therefore the question of taking the present physical features of the suit property has no relevance to the issue involved.
4 Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of considered opinion that in the facts of the case, the decision relied upon by the trial Court applies in all fours to the facts of the case and the decision relied on by the petitioner do not come to his aid. I do not see any error committed by the trial Court warranting interference by this Court. The revision fails and accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J
DATE: 18.12.2015
tvk
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5494 of 2015
Date:18.12.2015
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note physical features of suit property.
Whether past possession is relevant for a suit filed for permanent injunction.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
MALAMPATI KOTESWARA RAO Vs BANK OF BARODADistinguished¶16
MALAMPATI KOTESWARA RAO Vs BANK OF BARODA
ARREDLA RAMA REDDY Vs ARREDLA ALIVELAMMARelied on¶18
ARREDLA RAMA REDDY Vs ARREDLA ALIVELAMMA
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Akkim Ramanjineyulu
Pittu Nagendra
P. Naveen Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
