DAGUDU RAKESH KUMAR Vs. SILAMKOT FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, was directed against the order dated 09.12.2020 passed in I.A.No.2091 of 2020 in I.A.No.1708 of 2020 in O.S.No.584 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, wherein and whereby the trial Court allowed the I.A.No.2091 of 2020 filed by the respondents / defendants seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner.

(2.) The facts germane for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition, in nutshell, are that the revision petitioners filed the suit against the respondents for perpetual injunction in respect of suit schedule A to D properties which they are claiming by virtue of a registered partition deed dated 08.11.2006 and that the total extent of the property admeasuring Ac.1-38 guntas forming part of Sy.No.773/A at Kandi Village, was divided into four schedules in such partition deed. It is submitted that the schedule A to D properties, as mentioned in the suit are not located on the spot and still the said property is in a contagious one unit and there are no demarcations or physical partitions by metes and bounds as alleged by the petitioners herein. Under the guise of said documents, the revision petitioners obtained ad-interim injunction and are trying to forcibly dispossess the respondents from the property. Therefore, to come to right and proper conclusion with regard to the nature of the property, the respondents /defendants filed the I.A.No.2091 of 2020 seeking appointment of an advocate commissioner to note down the physical features of the petition schedule properties. The revision petitioners/plaintiffs contested the said petition. However, upon considering the material available on record and the contentions of both sides, the trial Court allowed the said I.A appointing an Advocate Commissioner for the said purpose. Hence the present Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) Heard Sri C.Raghu, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners / plaintiffs and Sri A.Veeraswany, learned counsel for the respondents / defendants and perused the record.