SURESH Vs. RAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit is one for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the plaint C' schedule fence causing obstruction to the plaint B' schedule pathway which is used for egress and ingress to the A' schedule property. There is also a prayer for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiffs from using the plaint B' schedule pathway or altering its physical features. The Advocate Commissioner deputed at the instance of the plaintiffs has already filed an interim report with a rough sketch showing the lie of plaint 'A','B' and 'C' schedule property.

(2.) THE defendants wanted a survey sketch particularly in regard to the plaint B' schedule pathway for which they wanted to depute another Advocate Commissioner in I.A No.2674/2011. The court below has by the order impugned dismissed the application for deputing another Advocate Commissioner to file a revised report with the aid of a Surveyor. It is true that an Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for the second time without setting aside the report and plan of the first Advocate Commissioner. But there can be no impediment to the same Advocate Commissioner being deputed to note certain additional facts as sought for by the parties for a proper adjudication.