S SURULI Vs. M SUNDHARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 580 of 2006, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Theni.

(2.) The Petition was strongly opposed by the respondent/defendant by stating that there is no encroachment in the suit property and the wall lies within the property owned by the defendant and that already a survey in this regard was conducted in the presence of both the parties and the petitioner was agreeable for the resolution taken on that occasion. Hence the petition has to be dismissed.

(3.) The learned Principal District Munsif, Theni, dismissed the application, by observing that in the plaint schedule, particulars of the encroachments with reference to the measurements have not been mentioned and hence there is no necessity to appoint any Advocate Commissioner and the portions referred to by the petitioner could not be identified either by the court Commissioner or by the Taluk Surveyor and that it could not be said that the Commissioner's report will assist the court for reaching a decision. It is further added that the petition has been filed for elongating the proceedings.