SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Mad) 1548

M.JAICHANDREN
Kalamani – Appellant
Versus
Ezhilarasan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V. Saratha Devi, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, N. Mala, Advocate.

Judgment :-

This civil revision petition has been filed against the order, dated 9.4.2009, made in I.A.No.1183 of 2008, in O.S.No.106 of 2003, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Jayankondam.

2. The petitioner had filed the suit, in O.S.No.106 of 2003, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Jayankondam, for the relief of permanent injunction. The petitioner had also filed an interlocutory application, in I.A.No.1183 of 2008, in O.S.No.106 of 2003, under Order XXVI Rules 9 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, to re-issue the warrant to the same Commissioner, who had inspected the suit property, earlier.

3. The trial Court had dismissed the said application stating that the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Court, in the year, 2003, had already filed a detailed report and plan and the respondents, who are the defendants in the suit, had also filed their objections to the said report. The petitioner had filed the interlocutory application, in I.A.No.1183 of 2008, belatedly, after a lapse of six years thereafter.

4. The only reason stated by the petitioner for reissuing the warrant to the same Advocate Commissioner is that he had not identified the suit property, pr






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top