R. JAYAVELU Vs. R. ASHOK AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the Order dated 12.02.2018 made in I.A.No.12267 of 2017 in O.S.No.8236 of 2006 on the file of the learned III Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.

(2.) The first respondent filed a suit against the revision petitioner and other respondents in O.S.No.8236 of 2006 on the file of the City Civil Court at Chennai for delivery of possession and for damages. In the said suit, after completion of pleadings and framing of issues, trail was commenced and after completion of evidence on the side of the first respondent/plaintiff, during the course of evidence on the side of the revision petitioner/first defendant, after examination of two witnesses on the side of the defendants, the revision petitioner/first defendant filed an application in I.A.No.12267 of 2017 in O.S.No.8236 of 2006, under Order 26, Rule 9 of C.P.C., to appoint an Advocate Commissioner along with a Civil Engineer to conduct an enquiry and to file his report in respect of the value of the property. After filling of counter, the trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that no Advocate Commissioner need to be appointed for fixing the value. Felling aggrieved with the order passed by the trial Court, the revision petitioner/first defendant filed the present revision petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the first respondent/plaintiff has not correctly valued the suit property and not paid the proper Court fee. If correctly valued the suit property, the City Civil Court, Chennai has no jurisdiction to try the suit and also raised those pleadings in the additional written statement. The learned trial Judge has failed to consider the said contention and simply dismissed the application mechanically without any valid reason.