1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:14.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.143 of 2011 and M.P(MD)NO.1 of 2011 1.Dhanaraj 2.Singaravelu 3.Arumugam .. Petitioners -vs- Vedasanthu Town Panchayat, Through its Executive Officer, Vedasanthur, Dindigul District. .. Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records and set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 17.03.2010 in I.A.No.26 of 2009 in A.S.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Fast Track Court,Additional District Judge, Dindigul and allow this revision with costs throughout and pass suitable orders. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Harihara Ramachandran For Respondent : Mr.K.Balasubramanian ORDER The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 17.03.2010 in I.A.No.26 of 2009 in A.S.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Fast Track Court, Dindigul. 2.The petitioners, who are the plaintiffs, have approached this Court against the order of appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property. The said application was filed before the appellate Court by the respondent, who is the appellant before the appellate Court. 3.The case of the petitioners is that they filed O.S.No.84 of 2004, seeking permanent injunction restraining the respondent from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners property. The suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners. Against the said decree, an appeal in A.S.No.1 of 2009 has been preferred. An application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner was taken out by the respondent to inspect the suit property with the help of Village Administrative Officer and Taluk Surveyor with A1 Register and Survey Maps pertaining to the suit property and other relevant records and note down the physical features and submit a report. The application was allowed by the trial Court. The said order is being challenged in this Civil Revision Petition. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner has been taken out belatedly that too, in the appeal suit. Secondly, he submitted that the appointment is sought for only to prove the possession of the respondent and the Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed for collecting evidence. Thirdly, he submitted that if the respondent wanted to rely upon the documents, it is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 always open to the respondent to rely upon the same, as they are already on record. Therefore, he sought for setting aside the said order. 5.In this case, the suit property measures about 23 cents, where a temple is built up by the petitioners and the same is under the control of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department. However, in the affidavit, the respondent states that the physical features of the suit property would prove that the suit property cannot be the exclusive property of the petitioners and the existence of three streets used by the public leading of Rajagopalapuram and other important physical features like hand pump, would confirm that the suit property should be that of Town Panchayat/respondent. The aforesaid contention would denote that public interest is also involved. 6.That apart, the Advocate Commissioner is appointed only to inspect the property with the help of Village Administrative Officer and Taluk Surveyor with records and note down physical features and submit the report. As rightly observed by the trial Court, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners and the Advocate Commissioner's report would only throw more light and would help proper adjudication of the issue. No evidence is sought to be collected, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7.In view of the reasons stated above, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Dindigul. +1cc to Mr.S.Harihara Ramachandran, Advocate SR.No.6515 +1cc to Mr.K.Balasubramanian, Advocate SR.No.6426 C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.143 of 2011 14.03.2011 ps PA/31.03.2011/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/