CRP No. 2732 of 2025 ____________ Page No.1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE CRP No. 2732 of 2025 AND CMP NO. 15435 OF 2025 1. Devi 2. Balaji 3. Baskar ..Petitioners Vs Rajapathi ..Respondent Prayer : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decretal order dated 05.04.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.149 of 2013 on the file of the Learned Principal District Munsif, Tiruvannamalai, by allowing the Revision and thus render justice. For Petitioners: Mr.S.Panneer Selvam For Respondent: Mr.R.Rajarajan – No Appearance ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order, dated 05.04.2025 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Tiruvannamalai, in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.149 of 2013. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2732 of 2025 ____________ Page No.2 of 4 2. Under the aforesaid order, the trial court allowed the application in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.149 of 2013 filed by the respondent seeking to set aside the report of the Advocate Commissioner, who was appointed through an order passed in I.A.No.343 of 2013. The application in I.A.No.343 of 2013 was filed by the petitioners seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property and to measure the subject property. 3. Admittedly, the Advocate Commissioner did not comply with the directions issued by the trial court to measure the suit schedule property. According to the respondent, only if the property is measured, it could be ascertained as to whether there is any encroachment or not. The trial court, while allowing the application in I.A.No.2 of 2024 filed by the respondent seeking to set aside the report filed by the Advocate Commissioner, who was appointed in I.A.No.343 of 2013, has observed that the Advocate Commissioner did not measure the suit schedule property as directed by the trial court in I.A.No.343 of 2013 and only on that ground, I.A.No.2 of 2024 filed by the respondent came to be allowed. When the Advocate Commissioner has not https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2732 of 2025 ____________ Page No.3 of 4 complied with the directions of the trial court in letter and spirit, this Court does not find any infirmity in the reasoning given by the trial court for allowing the application in I.A.No.2 of 2024 filed by the respondent. Since there is no infirmity in the impugned order, this Court is not entertaining this revision. 4. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 02-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sp To The Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruvannamalai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2732 of 2025 ____________ Page No.4 of 4 ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. sp CRP No. 2732 of 2025 AND CMP NO. 15435 OF 2025 02-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis