GNANASEKAR Vs. JEYASELAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CIVIL Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decretal order dated 24.02.2014 in I.A. No. 172 of 2014 in O.S. No. 89 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai.

(2.) AT the time of admission, argument of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is heard in length.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the trial Court while dismissing the application held that digging of two wells and also inserting of motor pump sets under the earth have been accepted by the defendants in the counter filed in the application, hence, appointment of Commissioner is not necessary to prove the possession and it is the duty of the plaintiff to prove his possession. The trial Court mainly focused upon that whether the suit property is a DC lands or Government poramboke lands and the same have to be decided only at the time of trial. It is not the case of the revision petitioner that the property is a DC land. Since the plaintiff filed the suit claiming title over the suit property without describing the physical features, the revision petitioner filed the application for appointment of Commissioner. But that factum was not considered by the trial Court and erroneously dismissed the application. Hence, he prayed for allowing the revision petition.