CRP/6458/2026 of N.Venkatesan Vs Gunasekaran on 8 October 2026

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the order dated 29.7.2026 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2026 in O.S.No.90 of 2018 pending on the file of the Additional Sub-Court, Chengalpattu (for short, the Court below) wherein the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff to examine the advocate commissioner and the surveyor as witnesses, came to be partly allowed by permitting the petitioner to examine only the advocate commissioner and rejecting the request in so far as examining the surveyor is concerned.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record and more particularly the impugned order.

4. The petitioner filed the said suit seeking for the relief of declaration of title and for recovery of vacant possession of the suit B schedule property from the hands of the respondent/defendant.

( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:48 am )

Pending the said suit, earlier, I.A.No.1 of 2022 was filed seeking to appoint an advocate commissioner to inspect the suit schedule property, measure the same and to submit a report along with a plan and it was allowed. Later, a report was filed by the advocate commissioner and based on that, certain objections were raised and by filing I.A.No.1 of 2026, the petitioner/plaintiff wanted to examine the advocate commissioner and the surveyor as witnesses. The Court below, by the impugned order, partly allowed I.A.No.1 of 2026 permitting the petitioner/plaintiff examine the advocate commissioner and rejecting the request to examine the surveyor on the ground that it was not necessary to independently examine the surveyor. Aggrieved by that, the above civil revision petition has been filed before this Court.

5. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the advocate commissioner was examined by the petitioner on 25.8.2026 and that he was not able to answer all the questions put by the petitioner regarding the measurement of the suit schedule property.

( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:48 am )

He deposed that it would be only the surveyor, who could answer all those questions.

6. In the considered view of this Court, if the advocate commissioner was not able to answer the questions regarding the measurement of the suit schedule property, the petitioner has to move another application before the Court below to summon the surveyor to clarify regarding the measurements made during the inspection. The impugned order passed by the Court below on 29.7.2026 will not stand in the way of the petitioner to file a fresh application. It goes without saying that if any such application is filed by the petitioner before the Court below, the same shall be considered and the entire process shall be completed within a period of four weeks thereafter.

7. The civil revision petition is disposed of in the above terms. Consequently, the connected CMP is closed. 08-10-2026

( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:48 am )

To The Additional Sub-Court, Chengalpattu. RS

( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:48 am )

N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS CRP.No.6458 of 2026& CMP.No.27786 of 2026 08-10-2026

( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:48 am )