CRP/6577/2026 of G.R.KRISHNAVEANI Vs C.MOHANARANGAM on 15 October 2026

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 01.09.2026 passed in I.A.No.7 of 2025 in O.S.No.9738 of 2021 on the file of I Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, wherein the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure the property with the help of a surveyor and to note down the physical features and to submit a report along with the plan, came to be dismissed by the Court below.

2. Heard learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.

3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.9738 of 2021 seeking for the relief of declaration declaring the sale deed dated 30.08.2018 in Document No.3035 of 2018 as null and void and declaring the patta issued in favour of the defendants 1 and 2 in respect of the suit property as null and void and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property.

4. The petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A.No.7 of 2025 in O.S.No.9738 of 2021 under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner on the ground that respondents 1 and 2/defendants 1 and 2 have put up an illegal construction without obtaining any proper sanction and they have encroached upon the property and in order to determine the extent of encroachment made by the respondents 1 and 2/defendants 1 and 2 and to ascertain the physical features of the property, the application came to be filed. The Court below dismissed this application mainly on the ground that appointment of Advocate Commissioner cannot be made for the purpose of gathering evidence.

5. Considering the nature of relief sought for, the Court below found that there is no need for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner since it will not help the Court to effectively dispose of the suit. The above finding rendered by the Court below does not warrant interference of this Court. The burden of proof is upon the petitioner/plaintiff to establish his case and get the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. In a case of this nature, there is no question of appointing Advocate Commissioner, more particularly, when mandatory injunction has not been sought for by the petitioner/plaintiff.

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. gm In the result, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm To I Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. Civil Revision Petition No.6577 of 2026