AANDAL Vs. A ANTHONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioners/petitioners/defendants have projected this civil revision petition as against the order dated 21.08.2008 in I.A.No.1084 of 2008 in O.S.No.277 of 2006 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioners under Order 26 Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code praying the trial Court to remit back the warrant to the same Advocate Commissioner, for the purpose of inspecting the suit property with the help of Taluk Surveyor, and to measure the property and to file his report.

(2.) THE trial Court, while passing orders in I.A.No.1084 of 2008, has inter alia opined that 'the Advocate Commissioner earlier has taken the assistance of the Taluk Surveyor and demarcated all the properties and measured the suit property by fixing survey stones and boundaries, as evidenced from his report and plan and also substantiated by P.W.2, the Taluk Surveyor and has resultantly dismissed the application.'

(3.) IT is not in dispute that before the trial Court the main case is at part-heard stage. Equally, it is an admitted fact that in regard to the fact that an Advocate Commissioner has already inspected the suit property and has surveyed the suit property along with the assistance of surveyor and has given his report. When in the main suit the trial has commenced and when the matter has reached the stage of defendants' side evidence, the present application I.A.No.1084 of 2008 has been filed to protract/stall the main proceedings, in the considered opinion of this Court. At this stage, the learned counsel for the respondent/ plaintiff brings it to the notice of this Court that in the main suit, the arguments were heard and the matter stands slated to 02.01.2009, for pronouncement of Judgment.