SUNDARA RAJAN Vs. SUSANA RAVI SEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendant in O.S. No. 465 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Salem is the revision Petitioner.

(2.) The Respondent/ Plaintiff filed the above suit for injunction restraining the revision Petitioner from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by trespassing into the suit property. The Respondent/ Plaintiff also filed an application in I.A. No. 1051 of 2010 for appointment of a Commissioner to measure the suit property as per the plan in the Compromise Decree in O.S. No. 191 of 1991 and note the physical features and it is alleged in the application that the Respondent suspected that the revision Petitioner might have encroached upon the suit property during his absence at Chennai. That application was allowed and Advocate Commissioner was appointed and aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. D. Ravichander the learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner that the lower Court allowed the application for appointment of Commissioner holding that no prejudice would be caused to the Defendant/revision Petitioner and relied upon the judgment reported in the matter of K.M.A. Wahab and 5 Ors. v. Eswaran and Anr., 2008 3 CTC 597, wherein this Court has held that an application for appointment of Commissioner cannot be ordered on the ground that no prejudice would be caused to the other side. He further submitted that the application was filed to collect the evidence and that was also deprecated in the above Judgment.