SEETHARAMA GOWDA S/O LATE MONAPPA GOWDA AND OTHERS Vs. DUGGAPPA GOWDA @ JANARDHANA GOWDA, S/O BOLIYANNA GOWDA AND RADHAKRISHNA GOWDA, S/O DUGGAPPA @ JANARDHANA GOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are aggrieved by the order dated 03.07.2010 passed in O.S. No. 48/2009 appointing a surveyor to assist the court commissioner appointed holding that assistance of a surveyor is necessary to the Court Commissioner in the light of the objections filed by both the parties to the report. A direction is issued to the court below to the Tahsildar to provide assistance of a surveyor to the Court Commissioner. The Court below has called for further report from the Commissioner after taking the assistance of the surveyor and by carrying out the work entrusted to the Commissioner. This order is challenged by the Defendants in the suit contending inter alia that the order is not a speaking order and the objections raised by the Petitioners to the report already filed by the advocate Commissioner have not been properly considered.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that that the advocate Commissioner was appointed at the request of the Plaintiffs before the service of summons cm the Defendants to ascertain the position of the road on the allegations made by the Plaintiffs that a new road was being formed by the Defendants. The advocate Commissioner has visited the spot and given a report. In the report dated 25.04.2009 the advocate Commissioner has stated that for the purpose of identifying the disputed area, assistance of a surveyor was necessary and without such assistance the same could not be done. He has also pointed out that the value of the trees that are destroyed also cannot be assessed without the assistance of an assessor. To this report, both the Plaintiffs and the Defendants have filed objections.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire materials on record. As the objections filed by both the parties to the report already submitted are not yet considered, the Court below will have to certainly consider their objections once the fresh report of the Commissioner drawn after taking assistance from the surveyor is submitted. What the Court below has now done while passing the impugned order is only to extend assistance of a surveyor to the Commissioner already appointed. There is absolutely no ground to interfere with this order as it does not in any manner prejudice the rights of either of the parties.