Sekar, v. Umaiyal,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.06.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and C.M.P.(MD)No.10518 of 2021 1.Sekar 2.Chellammal 3.Marimuthu 4.Kavitha 5.Gomathi 6.Meenal 7.Muniammal 8.Arulanthu 9.Jeyalatha 10.Jeyaraj 11.Jeyaraj 12.Mari 13.Masilamani 14.Karuppayee 15.Arulmary 16.Arockiyasamy 17.Radha 18.Chellam 19.Kilara 20.Alexander 21.Thenmozhi 22.Rajeswari 23.Laskmi 24.Selvi 25.Ubaharam 26.Baskar 27.Soosairethinam 1/5

28.Arockiyam 29.Ubaharam 30.Revathi 31.Rajeswari 32.Kaliammal 33.Arockiyamary 34.Arul Arockia Sundaram 35.Rakkammal 36.Rajeswari 37.Muthu Durai 38.Balu 39.Nagavel

...Petitioners

Vs.

Umaiyal

...Respondent

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.256 of 2020 in O.S.No.68 of 2020 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Aranthangi dated 25.10.2021.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Balakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.S.Ponsenthil Kumaran

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the order in I.A.No.256 of 2020 in O.S.No.68 of 2020 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Aranthangi dated 25.10.2021.

2/5

2.Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.68 of 2020, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Aranthangi. During trial, the respondent / plaintiff filed I.A.No.256 of 2020, for appointment of Advocate Commissioner. The said petition was allowed and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. He further submitted that during the pendency of the present Civil Revision Petition, the learned Advocate Commissioner filed a report before the Court below. Therefore, he seeks liberty to the petitioners to file their objections, if the Advocate Commissioner's report adversely affect the interests of the petitioners. 3.

In view of the above submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file their objections, if the Advocate Commissioner's report adversely affect the interests of the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20.06.

To 1.The Subordinate Judge, Aranthangi.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

M.DHANDAPANI , J.

MR 20.06.2025 5/5