JAYAKUMAR Vs. KOLANTHAIYAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 16th defendant is the Revision Petitioner herein. The first respondent herein filed the suit in O.S.No. 199 of 2014 for partition and separate possession of the suit property. The defendants filed the written statement alleging that there was a settlement in their favour and based upon the settlement, they are in possession of the property and in view of the possession, patta and chitta was received in their name and the suit is pending trial.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff filed I.A.No.946 of 2017 for Ordering appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the ground, since the defendants are making construction and improvement during the pendency of the suit and hence, in the event of success, they should not claim any right over the land or any construction made by the contesting defendant during the pendency of the suit and if so done, their right will be affected. Therefore, to note down the physical features, he wanted an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property and to file the physical features of the suit property as on the date of inspection and the same petition was filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 of C.P.C and the same was allowed. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that subsequent to the settlement effected in his favour, he has already put up superstructure and is also running business and hence this petition is intended to collect the evidence and hence prayed for setting aside the said order.