Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
N.S.Mohan Kumar S/o.Late Shanmugam, M.Preetha W/o. N.S. Mohan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
U.Jinendar Kumar S/o.P.Utttamkumar, V.Nilesh Kumar S/o. Late. Veerendra Kumar, S.Vinod S/o. Siluvainayagam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. seeking to set aside a trial court order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. need for appointing advocate commissioner affirmed. (Para 3) |
| 3. verdict allowing the revision petition. (Para 5) |
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the Fair and Final order dated 17.11.2025 made in I.A. No. 3 of 2022 in OS No. 568 of
2022 on the file of the Court of I Additional District Judge, Coimbatore.
2. The petitioners herein filed I.A. No. 3 of 2022 in OS No. 568 of 2022 on the file of the Court of I Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, seeking to appoint Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical feature and measure the property. Upon hearing both sides, the Trial Court held that Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed to find out the facts and gather the evidence of prove the case of the parties. Accordingly, dismissed the application.
Challenging the same, the petitioner filed this Civil Revision Petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners/plaintiffs filed the suit for the relief of declaration and injunction against the defendants stating that at the time of their purchase the description of property wrongly mentioned. T
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
