R ELANGO Vs. S KUPPUSAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST defendant has filed the civil revision petition challenging the order dated 13.4.2009 passed by the first Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode, in I.A.No,740 of 2007 in O.S.No. 70 of 2007.

(2.) THE suit is filed by the respondents/ plaintiffs for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Written statement has been filed on 11.8.2008. THE Suit in O.S.No. 70 of 2007 has been filed on 12.2.2007. THE plaintiffs seek right over the property consequent to the sale deed dated 16.9.2004 registered as document No. 2326 of 2004 before the Sub Registrar, Perundurai. On 13.8.2007, I.A.NO. 740 OF 2007 was filed by the first defendant/ revision petitioner for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to visit the suit property and to note down the physical features and take measurement of the property if necessary and to file a report. THE said application was resisted by the respondents/ plaintiffs stating that the application for appointment of Advocate Commissioner is a belated endeavour to delay the adjudication of the case and to collect evidence. THE description of the property in the suit schedule is very clear and unambiguous and therefore, there is no justification for the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. THE Court below having considered the rival contentions, rejected the application for appointment of Advocate Commissioner. Aggrieved thereby, the revision petition has been filed.

(3.) AS far as the apprehension raised by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the finding in paragraph 9 of the order under challenge may affect the ultimate out come of the suit is concerned, it has to be emphasized that the trial Court has to consider the oral and documentary evidence that may be relied upon by the rival parties and decide the issue independently and impartially without being influenced by any observation made in the order in the Interlocutory application. This will not be relevant for the final adjudication of the suit.