By consent of both counsel, the appeal itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The appellants have filed the above appeal against the order of injunction granted in

I.A. No.1868 of 1993 in O.S.No.365 of 1993 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Udumalpet. The only grievance of the appellants is that the respondents 1 and 2 who have filed the suit for specific performance have not produced any documents to show that they are in possession and even the Ex.A-1 agreement produced by them does not show that possession has been handed over to them. But the trial court has relied upon Ex.A-16, which is a Commissioner’s Report, filed before the Tahsildar, Record of Tenancy, and found that the respondents 1 and 2 are in possession of the suit property and granted injunction. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that no Commissioner could be appointed to find out the physical possession of the parties and even if the Commissioner files the report incidentally with regard to the possession of any specific parties, that cannot be taken into consideration by the courts and the possession has to be established by independent evidence and as such the reliance placed by th