K.G.KRISHNAN Vs. AJAYAKUMAR, S/O.MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is trite law that the report of the Advocate Commissioner is evidence only in the suit in which it is filed. This is evident from a mere reading of Order XXVI Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore the report of the Commissioner in O.S.No.519/2005 will not be part of evidence in the present suit - O.S.No.236/2007.

(2.) OF course the Advocate Commissioner in O.S.No.519/2005 can be examined in O.S.No.236/2007 to mark his report. But then the nature of controversy in O.S.No.519/2005 and O.S.No.236 of 2007 are different. O.S.No.519/2005 was for injunction and O.S.No.236/2007 is for damages for the use of buildings and machinery.

(3.) THE court below has allowed the application for commission to assess the value of the building only. There is no rationale in disallowing the request for valuation of the machineries. Valuation of the machineries with the aid of an expert may also be necessary to support the plaint claim. The defendants can as well object to the report and lead evidence to contradict the same.