P S VEERAPPA Vs. PALANIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petitioner/Defendant has filed the instant civil revision petition as against the order dated 28.10.2009 in I.A. No. 488 of 2009 in O.S. No. 3198 of 2004 passed by the Learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi.

(2.) The trial Court while passing the order in I.A. No. 488 of 2009, dated 28.10.2009 has among other things observed that the Revision Petitioner has filed the I.A. No. 488 of 2009 not in a proper fashion and moreover in the affidavit in I.A., the Revision Petitioner/Defendant has prayed for summoning the will dated 8.5.1998 bearing document No. 12 entered in Book No. 3, Volume-51, Page Nos. 47 to 51 from the Sub-Registrar Office, Paramathi and that he has not spell out as to whether the settlement deed dated 27.5.1968is in whose possession and who has produced the same before the court, etc. Also, the trial court has observed that the Revision Petitioner has not produced the 27.5.1968 settlement deed and as such the plea that the same has to be compared with that of the will dated 8.5.1998 cannot be accepted. Further, the petitioner has not filed any application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner and he has not informed his readiness or willingness to bear the expenses to be incurred thereto and resultantly,dismissed the application without costs.

(3.) Assailing the said order of dismissal of the trial court dated 28.10.2009 made in I.A. No. 488of 2009 in O.S. No. 3198 of 2004 on the file of the trial court, the Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner urges before this Court that the order of the trial court in I.A. No. 488 of 2009 suffers from material irregularities and further the trial court has failed to exercise its jurisdiction vested in Law.