1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:15.02.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.280 of 2011 and MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.1 of 2011 K.Rayappan .. Petitioner/1st Defendant Vs. A.Sureshkumar .. Respondent/Plaintiff Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decretal order dated 18.10.2010 passed in Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010 in Original Suit No.58 of 2006 by the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Dhanaseelan ORDER The impugned order dated 1riginal Suit No.58 of 2006 by the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil is being challenged in the present Civil Revision Petition. 2. The respondent herein as plaintiff has instituted Original Suit No.58 of 2006 on the file of the Court below praying to pass a decree of specific performance, wherein the p8.10.2010 passed in Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010 in Oresent revision petitioner has been shown as first defendant. During pendency of the same, the revision petitioner as petitioner has filed the petition in Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010 under Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the purpose mentioned therein. The Court below has dismissed the same. Against the dismissal order passed by the court below, the present Civil Revision Petition has been preferred. 3. Considering the nature of the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010, notice need not be sent to the respondent and the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed of on merits at the stage of admission. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has contended that Original Suit No.58 of 2006 has been instituted for getting the relief of specific performance and in fact the revision petitioner has not executed the suit sale agreement as alleged on the side of the respondent/plaintiff and the suit sale agreement has been executed as a security for the loan received by the revision petitioner from the respondent/plaintiff and even after execution of the suit sale agreement, the revision petitioner has obtained necessary permission so as to put up construction in the suit property and in fact the revision https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 petitioner has already put up construction and in order to note down the physical features of the suit property, the present petition has been filed in Interlocutory Application No.280 of 2011, but the Court below without considering the contention urged on the side of the revision petitioner has erroneously dismissed Interlocutory Application No.280 of 2011 and therefore the dismissal order passed by the Court below is liable to be interfered with. 5. For considering the submission made on the side of the revision petitioner, the Court has to look into paragraph No.2 of the written statement filed on the side of the revision petitioner/first defendant, wherein it has been clearly stated that for putting up construction, the first defendant has obtained necessary approval from Nagercoil Municipality and he also sunk a borewell in the suit property, but to utter dismay the revision petitioner has not filed any document along with Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010. Under the said circumstances, for the purpose of giving sufficient opportunity to the revision petitioner, it is needless to say that the impugned order passed by the Court below is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Court below. 6. In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed without costs at the stage of admission and the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.240 of 2010 in Original Suit No.58 of 2006 by the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil is set aside and the petition filed in Interlocutory Application No.280 of 2011 in Original Suit No.58 of 2006 is remitted to the file of the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil. The revision petitioner is strictly directed to produce all relevant documents so as to substantiate his contention urged on his side. The Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil is strictly directed to dispose of Interlocutory Application No.280 of 2011 in Original Suit No.58 of 2006 on the basis of the documents to be filed on the side of the revision petitioner. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. smn Sd/- Assistant Registrar[P&A] /True copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar The Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil. +1 cc to Mr.C.Dhanaseelan, Advocate SR.No.8893. C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.280 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 Dated:15.02.2011 2P/3C RPB 01.03.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/