K.valarmathi and others v. Kumaresan

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S. No. 171 of 2012 on lhe file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Jagtial pending disposal of the above CRP. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl. R R KALYAN Counsel for the Rrispondents: K VENUMADHAV The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE JTISTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO cIyrr, REVISION PETITION No.355O of 20123 ORDER: 1. This civil Revision petition is filed uncler Article 227 of constitution of India assailing the order dated 08-o2.2023 passed in I.A.No.g94 of 2022 in o.s.No.171 of 2oL2 by the learned principat Junior civil Judge, Jagtial. 2- Petitioner-plaintiff has filed I.A.No.B94 of 2022 under section 151 of cpc with a prayer to re-open Commissioner evidence i.e., CW-1.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial court ought to have s.een that a.pplication for re-opening of evidence was filed immerJiately upon coming to know about t]le closer of evidence of commissioner. cw-l evidence was closed on 2L.03.2o22 due to reporting no cross examination by earlier counsel before the learned trial Court. The trial Ccrurt ought to BRMR,J CRP.No.355O of 2023 z have seen that it was the specilic contention of the revision petitioner that earlier counsel on record has chosen not to cross examine CW- 1 and to summon one Mr.Raju, Mandal Surveyor, the valuable rights of the petitioner are involved in the lis and the learned trial has totally failed to look into the same and prayed to allowed the Civil Revision Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-defendant submits that the Commissioner was examined as CW- 1 and his report is marked as Ex.C- 1. The counsels appearing before the learned trial Court have reported no cross-examination, thereby the cross-examination of CW-1 is treated as 'NIL' on 2L.03-2022. Therefore, no interference is called for and prayed to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition.

5. Power of the High court under Article 227 is supervisory and is exercised to ensure courts and tribunals under its supervision act within the limits 9f 3 BRMR,J CRP.No.355O of 2023 their jurisdiction conferred by law. This power is to be sparingly exercised in cases where errors are apparent on the face of record, occasioning grave injustice by the court or tribunal assuming jurisdiction which it does not have, failing to exercise jurisdiction which it does have, or exercising its jurisdiction in a perverse manner (See: K.valarmathi and others Vs. Kumaresan 2o2s scc Online SC 985).

6. Petitioner has stated in the alfidavit in. I.A.No .g94 of 2022 that Mr. K.chandra Mohan, Advocate Commissioner is examined as CW- 1 and Ex.C- 1 - commissioner report is marked. The previous counsel did not choose to cross-examine cw- 1 to extract the facts of the report and the evidence of cw-l is closed and the suit is posted for arguments. so also the previous Advocate did not choose to summon the Mandal Surveyor by narne Mr.Raju, who assisted the Advocate commissioner in filing the report and prayed to re-open the same. ;:. ;,:::#EffiiiiS.:::":-.*.". .-", ,.i 4 BRMR,J CRP.No.355O of 2023 I

7. Respondent has filed his counter opposing the said application stating that the counsel has reported 'no objection'.

8.' The learned trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.894 of 2022 on O8.O2.2O23, which is assailed the Civil Revision Petition.

9. During the course of arguments, this Court has put a query to the petitioner counsel whether they have filed any objections to the Advocate Commissioner report. In turn the counsel submits that no such objections are filed but he has right to cross-examine CW- 1 with regard to Ex.C-1 report.

10. The affidavit filed by the petitioner is silent on what aspect the petitioner intends to cross-examine CW- 1. The learned trial Court in its order dated O8.O2.2O23 observed in para No.6 that the respondent-defendant has fileB @pfication in I.A.No.13 of 2OL8 for appointmeyt yf 5 BRMR,J ORP.No.3550 of 2023 Advocate Commissioner and the same was allowed by appointing Sri K. Chandra Mohan, Advocate as Advocate Commissioner on 01.10.2018, subscquently the said Commissioner has filed his report on 18.03.1202i and the report was accepted by the Court on 15.09.2021. It is further observed in the order that respondent-defendant has filed an application to summon the Advocate Commissioner vide I.A.No. 1066 of 2O2L, which carne to be allowed on 27.09.2021. Thereafter the Advocate Commissioner is examined as CW-l and his report is marked as Ex.C-l. The learned trial Court further observed in the order that counsel for the petitioner (revision petitioner) and counsel for respondent (respondent herein) reported no cross - exarnination and the cross - examination was treated as ,ML, on 21.03.2022 and the matter was posted for arguments.

11. The cross-examination of the Advocate Commissioner is treated as ,NIL, on 2L.O3.2022. Application is filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.g9 4 ol 2022 I 6 BRMR,J CRP.No.355O of 2023 n is on 26.09.2022 i.e., after a period of six months. The affidavit filed by the petitioner is silent with regard to the reasons on what aspect the Commissioner has to be examined the learned trial Court has properly appreciated the contentions raised by the learned counsels on record and rightly dismissed the application. The petitioner has not made out any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned trial Court and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. L2. The Civil Revision Petition is liable to dismissed and is accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Interim orders if any shall stand vacated. Miscellaneous Petitions shall stand closed. SD/. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR AS TSTANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER I To,

1. The Principal Junior civil Judge, Jagtial, Jagtial District. 2. One CC to SRl. R R I(ALYAN Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. K VENUMADHAV Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies q F- pk/PSL HIGH COURT DATED :10t11t2025 CRP.No.3550 of ZO23 -ta ty'ir:.t /rt \' I i)- ''t $ tr [[[ iffi ; tt _,ii ,,-'. ''.r/ * DISII/IISSED Pc 5l tv