SIKKANDAR DULGARNI Vs. MOHAMMED IBRAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed this Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 22.04.2008 in I.A. No. 84 of 2007 in A.S. No. 77 of 2003 passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Court, Dindigul, in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner under Order 26 Rule 9 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner.

(2.) The first appellate Court while passing order in I.A. No. 84 of 2007 in A.S. No. 77 of 2003 has inter alia, opined that on the side of the revision petitioner/plaintiff, sixteen documents have been marked and on the side of the respondent/defendant twenty four exhibits were marked and further, Exs.X.1 and X.2 were marked apart from the oral evidence tendered by the parties and a decision can be arrived at only based on the circumstances of the aforesaid materials and further that, the revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed the application for an appointment of advocate commissioner belatedly with a view to protract the proceedings and consequently, dismissed the application without costs.

(3.) Dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Dindigul, in I.A. No. 84 of 2007 in A.S.No.77 of 2003 dated 22.04.2008, the revision petitioner/plaintiff has projected this revision petition.