J PUGALENDHI Vs. EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 30.07.2008 passed by the learned XV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in I.A.No,2454 of 2008 in I.A.No.14269 of 2005 in O.S.No,4799 of 2005, this civil revision petition is focussed.

(2.) A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus: The revision petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No,4799 of 2005 for an injunction with the following prayer: for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant herein, his men, agents, servants, employees or anybody acting under or in trust for him, from disturbing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the tea stall being run by the plaintiff in a portion of premises No,2, Alaiyamman Koil backside, Sir Thyagaraya Road, Chennai 600 018 more particularly described in the Schedule "B" here under except through due process of law. It appears, the defendant entered appearance and filed the written statement. While so, I.A.No.14269 of 2005 was filed by the plaintiff seeking interim injunction, which was granted by the lower Court. Subsequently, I.A.No,2454 of 2008 was filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property. After hearing both the sides, the said application was dismissed. Being disconcerted by and dissatisfied with the order of the lower Court, this revision has been focussed on various grounds, inter alia thus: The lower Court erroneously dismissed the I.A for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner without considering the averments in the affidavit accompanying there to the area in which the suit property is situated would speak by itself that the case of the petitioner is well founded and that the entire project of the Slum Clearance Board in that area was only at the stage of infancy. Accordingly, he prayed for setting aside the impugned order of the lower Court.

(3.) HENCE, I could see no infirmity in the order passed by the lower court in I.A.No,2454 of 2008 and accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.