Back
KUNURU LAKSHMAN
Kota Mallaiah – Appellant
Versus
Mandala Sujatha – Respondent
ORDER :
Kunuru Lakshman, J.
1. Heard Smt. R. Madhavi Latha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Gaddam Srinivas, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 19.03.2024 passed in I.A.No.273 of 2021 in I.A.No.7 of 2020 in O.S.No.18 of 2020 by the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, at Karimnagar.
3. Respondent/plaintiff has filed a suit vide O.S.No.18 of 2020 for perpetual injunction restraining the petitioners/defendants and their men from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. She has also filed I.A.No.7 of 2020 in the said suit seeking ad-interim injunction. During pendency of the said suit and in the said I.A. No.7 of 2020, respondent/plaintiff has filed I.A.No.273 of 2021 under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC to appoint an Advocate-Commissioner to measure and fix boundaries to the lands in Sy.Nos.124 and 125 situated at Vegurupalli Village, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, and also to ascertain the suit land and its survey number through Mandal Surveyor, contending as follows:-
The appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner is justified under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC to resolve property boundary disputes, even if a previous suit exists, provided the circumstances differ.
In a suit for perpetual injunction, boundaries prevail over survey numbers, and the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain the location of the property is not justified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
