ORDER

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal orders dated 29.01.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.22 of

2018 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Erode.

2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.22 of 2018 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Erode. He filed the suit for a declaration of his title over the 'A' schedule property and for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the encroachment made in his property. He further sought for restraining the defendant and his men from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit 'B' schedule property. The respondent / defendant filed her written statement and both the parties went for trial after settlement of issues. The respondent/defendant filed an application in I.A.No.47 of 2018 for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for noting down the physical features of the suit property and also to measure the same with the help of a taluk surveyor. Accordingly, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he measured the land with the help of a taluk surveyor and filed his report along with the surveyor's plan on 03.03.2018. The learned Advocate Commissioner in his report had specifically stated that the respondent/defendant had not encroached upon the land of the plaintiff and that the entire extent of 2000 sq.ft. (plaintiff's property) is intact. Aggrieved over the Advocate Commissioner's report and plan, the present civil revision petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2019 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to scrap the report filed by the Advocate Commissioner.

3.The respondent/defendant filed a counter and after full contest, the learned trial court judge dismissed I.A.No.1 of 2019 on

29.01.2020 by observing that "The above petitioner / plaintiff had filed a petition praying this court to appoint the commissioner to measure the suit property with the help of taluk surveyor and to note down the physical features and encroachment if any and to file a report along with plan and the above IA was numbered as IA No.47/2018 and was allowed by this court and based on the direction given by this court the above commissioner had measured the suit property with the help of qualified surveyor and had filed a detailed report.

On perusal of the commission report and plan it comes to the light of this court that the commissioner in present of both the counsels and parties had visited the suit property and with the help of the surveyor in presence of Village Administrative Officer had measured the suit property and filed a detailed report.

This court is satisfied that there is no lacuna in the commission report as stated by the petitioner in his affidavit and it is pertinent to noted that as rightly stated by the respondent/defendant in his counter and that the commissioner had discharged his duty as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court and the present attempt of the petitioner is only with intent to get rid of the earlier report and thereby eschew the valuable evidence on record."

Aggrieved over the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

4.Heard Mr.D.Lakshmipathy, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Mr.S.Mukunth, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

5.Mr.D.Lakshmipathy, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner contended that the learned Advocate Commissioner without measuring the respondent's properties and other adjacent properties had filed a report and hence, the same is liable to be scrapped. He also relied on the decision in "Selvi Vs Dorathy Paul" reported in "2013 SCC Online Mad 926" wherein it has been observed thus:

26.When a Commissioner is appointed to locate the disputed land, he should carry out the measurements from both sides. In the absence of boundary marks, he should find out the correct boundaries of the nearby survey numbers and after ascertaining boundaries of such lands, three