Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
Kannappan – Appellant
Versus
Nageshwari – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of revision against dismissal of commissioner application (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioners justify need post-cross-examination (Para 3) |
| 3. court allows despite delay for fair adjudication (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. directions for commissioner and crp allowed (Para 6 , 7) |
ORDER
The revision petitioners have filed this petition, praying to set aside the order dated 22.7.2025 in IA.NO.5/2025 in OS.No.24/2009 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Kancheepuram.
2. Before the trial court, the plaintiffs filed an application in I.A. No. 5 of
2025 in OS.No.24/2009 seeking the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property. The application was dismissed by the learned trial judge on the ground that it was filed belatedly, nearly 18 years after the institution of the suit and after the commencement of trial, particularly at the stage of defence evidence.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit was filed for declaration and recovery of possession. During the cross-examination of PW1, a doubt arose regarding whether a Commissioner had been appointed to prove the alleged encroachment earlier, and hence, the present application was filed as
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
