MUSLIM MIDDLE SCHOOL Vs. VEDAVALLI AMMAL TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order passed by the lower court in scrapping the report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner in I. A. No. 1620 of 1999 and appointing another Advocate Commissioner.

(2.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even though certain defects are existing in the report submitted by the earlier Advocate Commissioner, Order 26 Rule 10 (3) of Civil Procedure Code empowers the court to direct a further enquiry by the very same Commissioner who shall file a supplementary report and in spite of the said direction, if any deficiency is noticed, it is only thereafter, the earlier report can be scrapped and another Advocate Commissioner can be appointed. In this connection, the learned counsel has relied on the decisions of this Court as well as the High Court of Kerala.

(3.) PER contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the Court below has scrapped the report of the Advocate Commissioner by considering the fact that serious defects are existing and as such, would also contend that the order does not call for interference.