LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-268

PANJAVARNAM Vs. VISUVASAM JEYASEELI

Decided On January 04, 2013
Panjavarnam Appellant
V/S
Visuvasam Jeyaseeli Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the sides. The epitome and the long and short of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus: The respondent / plaintiff filed the suit seeking declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property on the main ground that it is a vacant site. Whereas, the defendants filed the written statement contending that they have been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property by constructing a hut thereon.

(2.) UP went the proceedings and during the pendency of the suit, the I.A.No.914 of 2011 was filed by the defendants seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner to visit the suit property and note down the physical features and file a report with sketch. The plaintiff resisted the same and ultimately the I.A. was dismissed as against which this revision has been filed on various grounds.

(3.) HOWEVER , the learned counsel for the respondent / plaintiff would justify the order of the Lower Court by pointing out that the intention of the defendants is to get appointed the Advocate Commissioner only for the purpose of culling out and fishing out evidence to support their false plea.