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

2021 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 504

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
S. PALANISAMY – Appellant
Versus
LAKSHMI – Respondent


ORDER

These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed against the order made in I.A.Nos.633 of 2016 and 696 of 2018 in O.S.No.619 of 2015 dated 02.12.2016 and 02.08.2018 respectively, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Erode.

2. I.A.No.633 of 2016 was filed to appoint an Advocate Commissioner and I.A.No.696 of 2018 was filed to amend the plaint and both the applications were dismissed by the Court below. Aggrieved over the same, the present Civil Revision Petitions have been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner filed I.A.No.633 of 2016 for appointment of Advocate Commissioner, which is just and necessary to measure the suit property and the respondents' property for fixing the boundary lines between the Survey Nos.88/2 and 88/3 to solve the dispute. It would help the Court to bring quietus to the litigation. The Court below has dismissed the application filed for appointment of Advocate Commissioner with non application of mind.

4. He further submitted that the petitioner filed I.A.No.696 of 2018 for amending the plaint to include the prayer for fixing the boundary line between the properties of the petitioner and respondents and the

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