GOVINDAMMAL Vs. MUMTHAJ BEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision has been filed challenging the order dated 26.08.2014 passed by the learned District Munsif, Pallipattu in I.A.No. 444 of 2014 in O.S.No.49 of 2012. Brief facts leading to the filing of the instant revision:-

(2.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit O.S.No. 49 of 2012 and the respondent is the defendant. She filed a suit for declaration that she is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property. The petitioner is the owner of plot no.19 and the respondent is the owner of plot no.18 in the same layout. According to the petitioner, she purchased the property in 1989 through a registered sale deed dated 01.06.1989 and the respondent purchased her property only in the year 2000 and both of them have purchased their respective properties only from the same vendor.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that after purchasing the suit schedule property, she was living with her husband in Ahmadabad. According to the petitioner, she came to know about the encroachment made by the respondent only in the year 2012 and after coming to know about the encroachment, she filed a suit for declaration in O.S.No. 49 of 2012. During the pendency of the suit, after commencement of trial, the petitioner filed I.A.No. 444 of 2014 seeking for appointment of Taluk Surveyor, as Commissioner to measure the suit schedule property and to locate its boundaries and to submit his report with plan to the Court. It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No. 444 of 2014 that the respondent is the petitioner's adjacent plot owner having no right over the suit schedule property.