T.G.Suresh v. Smt.K.R.Anuradha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2661 of 2015 BETWEEN T.G. Suresh.

... PETITIONER AND Smt. K.R. Anuradha.

...RESPONDENT DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 21.07.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 1.

Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

No 2.

Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals No 3.

Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

No

ORDER:

Petitioner is a tenant against whom eviction proceedings in R.C.C.No.4 of 2014 are instituted by the respondent/landlady. The respondent/landlady has filed an application I.A.No.831 of 2014 for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features. That application has been allowed by the learned Rent Controllercum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor under impugned order dated 06.05.2015. The present revision is directed against the said order.

2. I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order as para 11 of the eviction petition mentions the pleadings of the petitioner therein regarding the alleged damages caused to the building impairing the value of the building by the tenant. Apart from that, the present application, filed for appointment of Advocate Commissioner, is only to note down physical features and damages, if any, caused to the building. Whether the said damages are caused by the petitioner or not is a matter of evidence and as such, it cannot be said that the appointment of Advocate Commissioner is for collecting evidence. The Court below has rightly allowed the said application and as such, no interference is called for.

The civil revision petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J July 21, 2015 DSK