S NARAYANAN Vs. SARADHA KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order, dated 04.11.2016 passed in E.A. No. 409 of 2015 in E.P. No. 69 of 2014 in O.S. No. 553 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli.

(2.) The first respondent herein/plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S. No. 553 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, for permanent injunction. An exparte order was passed on 11.09.2013 in the aforesaid suit. Therefore, R-1 herein/plaintiff has filed a petition in E.P. No. 69 of 2014 in O.S .No. 553 of 2010. Thereafter, R-1 herein/plaintiff has filed a petition in E.A. No.409 of 2015 in E.P. No. 69 of 2014 in O.S .No. 553 of 2010 for appointment of Advocate Commissioner and the same was allowed on 04.11.2016. Against the order, dated 04.11.2016 the instant Civil Revision Petition is filed.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the Court below ought to have considered that the revision petitioner herein is not a party in the suit in O.S. No.553 of 2010 and as such the Execution application (EA) as against the revision petitioner is not maintainable. He further submitted that the Execution Court has failed to note that the Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for collecting evidence. He further submitted that the Court below ought to have noted that the revision petitioner/3rd party and Execution petition in E.P. No.69 of 2014 is not at all maintainable as against the revision petitioner. He further submitted that the Order of the Court below in E.A. No. 409 of 2015 in E.P. No. 69 of 2014 in O.S. No. 553 of 2010 is liable to set aside. Hence, he prayed to allow the Civil Revision Petition.