R SIVASUBRAMANIAN Vs. S BALAMURUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner has sought for setting aside the Order dated 9. 10. 2003 made in I. A. No. 729 of 2003 in O. S. No. 247 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai. The revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit.

(2.) THE respondent/plaintiff filed the suit seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner/defendant from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit property either by cutting the fence or by shifting the same and pending the suit, the petitioner/defendant filed an Interlocutory Application in I. A. No. 61 of 2003 seeking for appointment of a Surveyor attached to the Taluk Office, Tharangambadi as commissioner in order to measure the suit property and fix the boundary and the trial Court allowed the Interlocutory Application and appointed the surveyor as Commissioner and he inspected the suit property and measured the same in the presence of both parties and also their Advocates and submitted his Report. The respondent/plaintiff filed his objections to the report. Later, the respondent/plaintiff filed another Interlocutory Application in i. A. No. 72 9 of 2003 seeking for appointment of a District Head Surveyor as commissioner to measure the suit property and submit a Report and that application was allowed by the trial court and challenging the same, the defendant in the suit has preferred the present revision.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the impugned Order appointing the second Commissioner without assigning any reason and without rendering any opinion as to the Report of the earlier commissioner is contrary to law and in support of his contention he relies on decisions of this Court in R. VISWANATHAN v. . P. SHANMUGHAM [1985 (1) MLJ 254] and K. KANDASWAMY AND ANOTHER v. . K. C. RAMASWAMI and OTHERS [1988 (2) LW 440]. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent contends that the earlier Commissioner measured only the defendant's property and that too not in accordance with the document and the respondent herein has filed his objections to the Commissioner's Report and that necessitated the filing of the second Interlocutory Application seeking for appointment of a fresh commissioner.