Vijaya Sarathi, v. Dr.Bhagavathi Ammal

ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners to set aside the order dated 23.03.2023 passed in I.A. No.14 of 2022 in O.S. No. 143 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil.

2.The petitioners are the defendants before the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil in O.S.No.143 of 2019 filed by the respondent herein (plaintiff). The suit has been filed by the respondent for the following reliefs:- '(A) For declaration of plaintiffs pathway right over the plaint 'B' scheduled private common pathway and her right over the same for her use as an access to ingress and egress to her plaint'A' scheduled house property to and from the main east-west road on the south of the plaint 'B' schedule common pathway as shown in the plaint rough plan.

(B) For an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men and servants from causing any disturbance or obstruction or interferance with the plaintiff's joint right, possession and enjoyment over the plaint 'B' schedule private common pathway and her use of the same as an access to ingress and egress to her plaint'A' scheduled house property to and from the main east-west road on the south of the plaint 'B' schedule common pathway as shown in the plaint rough plan in any manner. Whatsoever, till the disposal of the suit.

(C) For an order of mandatory injunction direction and compelling the defendants and their men and servants to take out and remove all the obstruction materials like stones etc., from the plaint 'B' schedule pathway and to demolish and remove the newly constructed obstruction wall on the southern side of the said pathway as shown in the plaint rough plan and to restore and maintain the said common pathway as stated in plaintiff's sale deed dated 28.11.2018 in its original condition and if the defendants fail to do the same, plaintiff be allowed to do the same through the execution proceedings in this case and to realize the entire expenses for the same from them as if it were the costs of the suit;

(D) For realization of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) and Twenty Thousand Only) as damages, from the defendants and their assests with 12% interest on the same, from the date of plaint (22.04.2019) till date of realization of full amount to the plaintiffs from the defendants jointly and severally;

(E) For realization of full costs of the suit from the defendants and their assets;

(F) For such other reliefs as this Court deem firt and necessary in the circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice from the defendants to the plaintiffs; '

3.The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated

23.03.2023 passed by the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil in I.A. No.14 of 2022 in O.S. No. 143 of 2019 The operative portion of the impugned order reads as under:- '10.tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; jd;Dila mwpf;ifapy; 'gp' gl;oif brhj;jpy; bjw;F gf;f mst[ 28 mo vd rhpahfj;jhd; Fwpg;gpl;oUf;fpwhh;. mt;thW bjw;F gf;fk; cs;s Rtw;wpy; 4mo mst[f;F jpwg;g[ cs;sJ vd;gija[k; rhpahfj;jhd; Fwpg;gpl;oUf;fpwhh;.

mtUila

mwpf;ifapy;

vt;tpj FHg;gKk ,y;iy. 28 mo ePsj;jpw;F Rth; fl;lg;gl;L mjpy; 4 mo ePs;j;jpw;F jpwg;g[ cs;sJ vd;W jhd; tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; Fwpg;gpl;LUf;fpwhh;. Me;j tptuj;ij gpujpthjpfs; jug;gpy; jhf;fy; bra;j vjph;tHf;FijapYk; ghuh 2y; xg;g[f;bfhz;oUf;fpwhh;fs; bjw;F gf;fj;jpy; fhk;g[tz;l; Rth; cs;sJ. Mjpy; brhj;Jf;F brd;W tu xU jpwg;g[ cs;sJ vd;W xg;g[f;bfhz;oUf;fpwhh;fs;. Vdnt> bjw;F gf;f mo msit bghWj;J FHg;gk; cs;sjhf kDjhuh;fs; jug;gpy; brhy;yg;gLtJ Vw;fj;jf;fjhf ,y;iy. mnj nghd;W 'gp' gl;oif brhj;jpd; bjw;F gf;f mo mst[ 77. Mdhy; jw;nghJ 75.75 mo kl;Lnk ,Ug;gjhf tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; Fwpg;gpl;oUf;fpwhh; vd brhy;yg;gLtij bghWj;J tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; ghh;itapl;l

rkaj;jpy;

fhz;g;gl;l

tptuj;ij Fwpg;gpl;LUf;fpwhh;. Mth; ghh;itapl;l nghJ kPjKs;s 1 1/2 moia thjpapd; Kd;ndhuhd tp$angh]; Mf;fpukpj;J tpl;lhh; vd gpujpthjpfs; jug;gpy; vt;tpj Fwpg;g[k; tHf;fwpQh; Mizaj;jplk; bfhLf;fg;gl;oUf;ftpy;iy. 'gp' gl;oif brhj;jpd; g[ vz;Zk; 'v' gl;oif brhj;jpd; g[y vz;Zk; bt;tntW vd;w epiyapy;> 'gp' gl;oif brhj;jpyy; nkw;F gf;fj;jpy; 77 mo ,Ue;jJ vd;gija[k;> mjpy; 1 1/2 moahdJ thjpapd; Kd;ndhuhy; Mf;fpukpf;fg;gl;Ltpl;lJ vd;gija[k; gpujpthjpfs; jug;g[ jhd; epU:gzk; bra;a flikg;gl;lJ. Mij tpLj;J me;j gpzia tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; bra;a ntz;Lbkd kDjhuh;fs; jug;gpy; nfhug;gLtJ Vw;fj;jf;fJ ,;y;iy. tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; K:ykhf rhl;rpaq;fis jpul;Ltjw;F ve;j jug;ghUf;Fk; chpik ,y;iy. 'gp' gl;oif brhj;jpd; g[y vz;Zk; 'v' gl;oif brhj;jpd; g[y vz;Zk; btt;ntwhdit vd;w epiyapy; nkw;go g[y vz;zpy; ];jyj;jpy; ve;j mst[ cs;snjh mij jhd; tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; epy msitanuhL mse;J mwp;f;if jhf;fy; bra;jpUf;fpwhh;. Vdnt> tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; mwpf;ifapy; kDjhuh;fs; jug;gpy; Rl;of;fhl;LtJ nghd;W vt;tpj FiwghLfSk; fhzg;gltpy;iy vd ,e;j ePjpkd;wk; Kot[ bra;fpwJ.

11.tHf;fif ,Gj;joj;J fhyk; flj;Jtjw;F xt;bthU fhuzq;fshf fz;lwpe;J kDjhuh;fs; jug;g[ kDf;fs; jhf;fy; bra;tij tHf;fkhf itj;Js;sJ. Me;j tifapy; vt;tpj mog;gil fhuzKk; ,y;yhky; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;l kD jhd; ,e;j kD. Kdjhuh;fs; jug;gpy; brhy;yg;gLtJ nghd;W tHf;fwpQh; Mizah; mwp;f;ifapy; vt;tpj FiwghLk; fhzg;gotpy;iy. Vdnt> tHf;fwQh; Mizah; mwpf;ifahdJ epuhfhpf;fg;gl ntz;oa mtrpak; Vw;gltpy;iy. Vdnt> ,e;j kD js;Sgof;FwpaJ vd ,e;j ePjpkd;wk; Kot[ bra;J> kDjhuh;fspd; kDit vjph;kDjhuh; jug;g[ bryt[j;bjhifnahL js;Sgo bra;a Kot[ bra;fpwJ.'

4.In the said suit, the respondent had also filed I.A.No.3 of 2019 for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to give a report under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC. Perusal of the order passed by the Trial Court on 25.04.2019, the Advocate Commissioner has given a report on 27.10.2020. Mean while, the petitioners/defendants also filed their written statement disputing the claim of the respondent in respect of 'B' schedule property which is a pathway. The petitioners have filed I.A.No.14 of 2020 for appointing a new Advocate Commissioner to scrap the report of the Advocate Commissioner.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the description of the property disputed in schedule 'B' & the sketch annexed to the plaintiff's vendor sale deed dated 06.01.2012, the description of the property in the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs vide sale deed dated 28.11.2018 are in variance with the schedule in the plaint. It submitted that the petitioners' right over 'B' schedule property is ½ cents. Whereas, the respondent is claiming rights over the entire extent of 4 cents of land meant for pathway. It is further submitted that the report given by the Advocate Commissioner on 27.10.2020 is enormous and ought to have scrapped by the Trial Court.

6.I have considered the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

7.The petitioners are aggrieved by the report given by the Advocate Commissioner dated 27.10.2020. It is always open for the petitioners to adduce oral and documentary evidence to establish that the respondent has no right over the entire extent of 'B' schedule property. The prayer that has been rightly rejected by the Trial Court. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order.

8.The suit is of the year 2019. Since the petitioners filed written statement, the Trial Court is directed to frame issues and proceed with the trial as expeditiously as possible and closure to the dispute one way or other.

9.With the above direction, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

25.04.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No dss To

1.The Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil .

2.The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. C.SARAVANAN,J. dss C.R.P(MD).No.1112 of 2023 and C.M.P(MD).No.5361 of 2023

25.04.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.04.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN C.R.P(MD).No.1112 of 2023 and C.M.P(MD).No.5361 of 2023 1.Vijaya Sarathi 2.Balachandran ... Petitioners/Petitioners/Defendants Vs. Dr.Bhagavathi Ammal ... Respondent/Respondent/Plaintiff PRAYER:- This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 23.03.2023 passed in I.A. No.14 of 2022 in O.S. No. 143 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil and allow the Civil Revision Petition. For petitioner : Mr.I.Robert Chandrakumar