Veeravadivel Murugan v. The District Collector

ORDER The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order passed in I.A.No.4 of 2022 in O.S.No.34 of 2021 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sattur dated 11.01.2023.

¶2The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order, dated

11.01.2023 passed by the District Munsif Court, Sattur in I.A.No.4 of 2022 in O.S.No.34 of 2021.

¶3By the impugned order, the District Munsif Court, Sattur has dismissed I.A.No.4 of 2022 filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. for appointing an Advocate Commissioner. The relevant portion of the order reads as under: "7.jPh;T: ,Ujug;Gk; Nfl;fg;gl;lJ Mtzq;fs; ghprPypf;fg;gl;lJ. Mtzq;fis ghprPyiz nra;jjpy;> mry; tof;F epue;ju epiyAWj;Jf;fl;lis ghpfhuk; kw;Wk; ,ju ghpfhuq;fs; Nfhhp tof;F jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;s epiyapy;> kDjhuh; jug;gpy; ePjpkd;w Mizah; epakdk; nra;a Ntz;Lnkd;W ,k;kD jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ. kDtpy; nrhy;yg;gLk; fhuzq;fs; ,e;j tof;fpy; ,e;j #o;epiyapy; ,e;ePjpkd;wj;jhy; Vw;Gilajhf

,y;iy.

vjph;kDjhuh;fshy;

jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUf;Fk; vjph;ciuAk; mJ Fwpj;J thjplg;gl;lJk; ,e;j kDtpy; ,e;j #o;epiyapy; ,e;j tof;fpy; Vw;Gilajhf cs;sJ. ,e;j tof;fhdJ gpujpthjpfs; jug;gpy; jgrpy; nrhj;jpy; Fspay; njhl;b fl;lf;$lhnjd epue;ju cWj;Jf;fl;lis ghpfhuk; Nfhhp jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;l xd;whFk;. ,e;j kDthdJ ePjpkd;w Mizah; mth;fis epakdk; nra;J mth; tUtha;j;Jiw Mtzq;fs; kw;Wk; mjpfhhpfspd; cjptNahLk; jgrpy; nrhj;jpidg; ghh;itapl;L mwpf;if jhf;fy; nra;tjw;F jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ. epue;ju cWj;Jf;fl;lis ghpfhuk; Nfhhp jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUf;Fk; tof;fpy; rhl;rpa rhd;whtzq;fs; %yk; kl;LNk jq;fsJ jug;ig ep&gzk; nra;a Kbak;. Gjpa rhd;W kw;Wk; rhl;rpaq;fis Nrfhpg;gjw;fhf ePjpkd;w Mizaiu epakdk; nra;a KbahJ. kDjhuhy; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUf;Fk;

,e;j

kD

,e;j

tof;fpy; Vw;Gilajhf ,y;iy vd;gjhYk;> ePjpkd;w Mizaiu epakdk; nra;a Ntz;ba mtrpak; ,y;iy vd;gjhYk;> kDjhuhy; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUf;fk; ,e;j kDtpid mDkjpf;f Ntz;ba mtrpak; ,y;iy vd KbT nra;J> ,k;kDtpid nryT njhifapd;wp js;Sgb nra;J ,e;ePjpkd;wk; cj;jutpLfpwJ. ,Wjpahf> jhth kDtpid mDkjpj;J ePjpkd;w Mizah; mth;fis epakdk; nra;J mth; tUtha;j;Jis Mtzq;fs; kw;Wk; mjpfhupfspd; cjtpNahLk; jgrpy; nrhj;jpidg;

ghh;itapl;L

mwpf;if

rkh;g;gpf;FkhW

26.09.2022k; Njjp jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUf;Fk; ,k;kDtpid nryT njhifapd;wp js;Sgb nra;J ,e;ePjpkd;wk; cj;jutpLfpwJ."

¶4The petitioners are the Villagers of Ammaiyarpatti, Sevalpatti Post, Vembakottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District. They have filed the suit in the representative capacity espousing the causes of all the villagers. They have filed the above suit for restraining the respondents from putting up the bathing tub on the land which according to the petitioner is used as a car track enabling the villagers to reach the bus stop on the main road and the temple near the suit schedule property.

¶5The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not only obtained necessary permission from the lower Court under Section 80 of C.P.C but also under Order 1 Rule 8 of C.P.C. It is submitted that the District Munsif Court, Sattur has committed a grave error in rejecting the application filed by the petitioners in I.A.No.4 of 2022 for appointing an Advocate Commissioner inasmuch as the petitioners are not attempting to collect evidence as the land in question is merely used as a car tract. It is submitted that the averments in Paragraph 6 of the written statement filed by the respondents that there is a motor room and over head tank on the suit schedule property is incorrect.

¶6Per contra, the Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 refer to Paragraph No.7 of the written statement, wherein, it has been stated that the tank has been put up to meet the long term demdand of the villagers. Paragraph No.7 of the written statement reads as under: "7. NkYk;> i\ fpuhk nghJ kf;fspd; ePz;l ehs; Nfhhpf;ifapd; Nghpy; gQ;rhaj;jpypUe;J Kiwahf Vf kdjhf jPh;khdk; epiwNtw;wg;gl;L muRk; epjp xJf;fPL nra;J Nkw;gb jpl;lg;gzpahdJ Muk;gpf;fg;gl;l epiyapy; thjpfs; cs;Nehf;fj;Jsld; murpd; ey jpl;l gzpapid jLf;Fk; Nehf;fpy; ,t;tof;if jhf;fy; nra;Js;shh;. NkYk; thjpfisj; jtph;j;J thjpfspd; r%fj;ijr; Nrh;e;j kw;w kf;fSk; kw;w midj;J r%fq;fis Nrh;e;j kf;fSk; Fspay; njhl;b mikg;gjw;F ve;j Ml;NrgidAk; njhptpf;ftpy;iy. NkYk; i\ fpuhkj;jpy; NtW Fspay; njhl;bAk; fpilahJ. mjdhy; midj;J kf;fSk; ngUk; rpukj;jpy; cs;sdh;. thjpfs; 4-k; gpujpthjpapd; Nghpy; Vw;gl;Ls;s td;kj;jpd; fhuzkhf 4-k; gpujpthjpapd; ew;ngaUf;F fsq;fk; Vw;gLj;jTk; 4-k; gpujpthjpapd; gzpf;F ,ilA+W nra;a Ntz;Lk; vd;w nfl;l vz;zj;jpy; cs; Nehf;fj;Jld; jhth tof;F jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;s fhuzj;jpw;fhfNt jhth tof;F js;Sgb nra;ag;gl Ntz;ba xd;whFk;."

¶7I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3.

¶8Though the suit was filed for mandatory injucntion by the members of the same family, there cannot be strict rule in all cases of mandatory injunction. The relief for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to give a report of the physical features can be denied if such an application is filed to collect evidence through the Office of an Advocate Commissioner. The Court in appropriate case can exercise the discretion to appoint an Advocate Commissioner.

¶9It is the specific case of the petitioners that the respondents have proposed to put up bath tub on a car track and that a over head tank is situated away from the car track and that extent, an Advocate Commissioner can be appointed to give a report as to whether the over head tank and the motor room is at the place where the proposed property is situated adjacent to the car trat or nearby.

¶10The impugned order passed by the learned District Munsif Court, Sattur on 11.01.2023 is liable to be set aside. Application in I.A.No.4 of 2022 is therefore allowed. The case is therefore remitted back to the Court to issue warrant to an Advocate Commissioner to give a report regarding the physical features of the land alone. This exercise shall be carried out by the District Munsif Court, Sattur within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. After the report is received within a reasonable period, the Court shall proceed with the trial after framing issues and pass judgment and decree within a peirod of 12 months thereafter.

¶11The present Civil Revision Petition stands allowed with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

24.04.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn To

1.The District Munsif Court, Sattur.

2.The Section Officer Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. C.SARAVANAN

,J.

SN

24.04.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.04.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and C.M.P(MD)No.4768 of 2023 1.Veeravadivel Murugan 2.Velusamy 3.Saravana Kumar 4.Bala Murugan 5.Aaval Sidhu 6.Raju 7.Raja Sekar 8.Ponraj 9.Murugan 10.Sarashvathi 11.Jeyalakshmi 12.Lakshmi 13.Seetha Lakshmi 14.Palanichamy Pandi ...Petitioners/Petitioners/ Plaintiff (For themselves and in the representative capacity of the villagers of the Ammaiyarpatti Village, Vembakottai Taluk) Vs. 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar 2.The Block Development Officer, Vembakottai. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vembakottai. 4.Nageshwari, The President, Sevalpatti. ... Respondents/Respondents/ Defendants PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.4 of 2022 in O.S.No.34 of 2021 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sattur dated 11.01.2023. For Petitioners : M/s.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya For R1 to R3 : Mr.G.Sivaraja Government Advocate