CRP/1196/2024 of Nagammal Vs M.Ramalingam on 14 October 2026

COMMON ORDER

These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed challenging the fair and decreetal orders passed in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2023 in OS.No.258 of 2019, dated 08.9.2023, on the file of II Additional District Munsif, Salem, wherein the applications filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for reopening and for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features and measure the property with the surveyor and to submit a report along with the plan, came to be dismissed by the Court below.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent.

3. This Court carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record. This Court also went through the order passed by the Court below.

( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 04:31:58 pm )

4. In the case in hand, the petitioner/plaintiff initially filed the suit seeking for the relief of permanent injunction and later it was amended to include the relief of declaration and mandatory injunction in the year 2021. The trial commenced and the evidence on the side of the plaintiff was completed on 18.04.2023. Thereafter, the evidence on the side of defence was also closed on 05.3.2024 and the case was posted for arguments on 14.03.2024. At this stage, these applications came to be filed and the Court below came to a conclusion that the Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence and that there was absolutely no explanation as to why such applications were not filed at the earliest point of time and hence these applications were dismissed.

5. The petitioner/plaintiff has filed the application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner only on the ground that the respondent/defendant has encroached upon the suit property and is attempting to obliterate the cement pathway and causing disturbance to the petitioner. For this purpose, the petitioner wanted an Advocate Commissioner to conduct a survey and to submit a report.

6. As rightly held by the Court below, an Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence. If ultimately the petitioner/plaintiff is able to establish the title over the property, the other

( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 04:31:58 pm )

consequential prayers of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction will automatically follow through. It will not be necessary to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for this purpose since it will not in any way help the Court below to effectively dispose of the suit. In view of the same, the order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court.

7. In the result, the orders passed by the Court below in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2023 in OS.No.258 of 2019, dated 08.9.2023, on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Salem, is confirmed and accordingly, these CRPs are dismissed. There shall be a direction to the learned II Additional District Munsif, Salem, to dispose of the suit in OS.No.258 of 2019, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

8. In the result, both the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed in the above terms .No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 14-10-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No kp

( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 04:31:58 pm )

To II Additional District Munsif, Salem.

( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 04:31:58 pm )

N.ANAND VENKATESH J. kp CRP No. 1196 of 2024 and CRP No. 1198 of 2024 14-10-2026

( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 04:31:58 pm )