w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. VA Innova Alloy Steel Tech Pvt. Ltd. v/s Avinash Daga


Company & Directors' Information:- S A L STEEL LIMITED [Active] CIN = L29199GJ2003PLC043148

Company & Directors' Information:- K TECH PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25190TN2012PTC084486

Company & Directors' Information:- M M S STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27109TZ1996PTC006849

Company & Directors' Information:- G. O. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27100PB2007PTC031033

Company & Directors' Information:- M TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U30007DL1997PTC087580

Company & Directors' Information:- C P S STEEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27104TZ2003PTC010552

Company & Directors' Information:- K. TECH (INDIA) LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24222MH2000PLC123695

Company & Directors' Information:- J M G STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27105BR1992PTC004985

Company & Directors' Information:- H L STEEL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U27107AS1992PTC003726

Company & Directors' Information:- K V M STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29141DL1988PTC031248

Company & Directors' Information:- K STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27104JH1973PTC000998

Company & Directors' Information:- A K TECH LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1986PLC023700

Company & Directors' Information:- R. J. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28112MH2009PTC193047

Company & Directors' Information:- M M STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27107MH2001PTC131270

Company & Directors' Information:- Z-TECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC062582

Company & Directors' Information:- B L STEEL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51909WB1981PTC034021

Company & Directors' Information:- R K G STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27109DL2004PTC128852

Company & Directors' Information:- V B STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28112MH2010PTC211691

Company & Directors' Information:- I B STEEL COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28910MH2010PTC211344

Company & Directors' Information:- J S C STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27106UP2013PTC061568

Company & Directors' Information:- S. M. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101MH2013PTC239811

Company & Directors' Information:- E-TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101MH2013PTC240790

Company & Directors' Information:- R K P STEEL LTD [Active] CIN = L27109WB1980PLC033206

Company & Directors' Information:- C P STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27100WB2008PTC127447

Company & Directors' Information:- A. K. J. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28112WB2010PTC144880

Company & Directors' Information:- TECH INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201AS1995PLC004380

Company & Directors' Information:- C D STEEL PVT LTD [Under Liquidation] CIN = U27109WB1981PTC034340

Company & Directors' Information:- T M S STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U02710TZ1996PTC007498

Company & Directors' Information:- P M R STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51102DL2003PTC122675

Company & Directors' Information:- C T STEEL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U27109WB2005PTC106634

Company & Directors' Information:- P G STEEL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U24111AS1998PTC005409

Company & Directors' Information:- S I TECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U32109MH2003PTC140622

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND S STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090DL1987PTC027835

Company & Directors' Information:- R P K ALLOY STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27104TN1989PTC016867

Company & Directors' Information:- J S STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52190CT1978PTC001432

Company & Directors' Information:- U M STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27209TN1986PTC013670

Company & Directors' Information:- E & G STEEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28113PN2009PTC134643

Company & Directors' Information:- M. P. ALLOY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28111UP1995PTC018405

Company & Directors' Information:- L N STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27310WB2007PTC118206

Company & Directors' Information:- K. D. W. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28910UP2011PTC043976

Company & Directors' Information:- R. N. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27100WB2007PTC116588

Company & Directors' Information:- S C TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400HR2015PTC055858

Company & Directors' Information:- P M STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27105MP1982PTC001915

Company & Directors' Information:- M R STEEL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27100TG2013PTC088808

Company & Directors' Information:- C K STEEL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29150WB1975PTC030259

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND D TECH PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U33112PN2004PTC018927

Company & Directors' Information:- K. V. TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U28939MH2008PTC181898

Company & Directors' Information:- S K E-TECH PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72900WB2011PTC160500

Company & Directors' Information:- D-TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL2016PTC304389

Company & Directors' Information:- K STEEL & COMPANY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1991PTC053960

Company & Directors' Information:- N S STEEL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U27106PB1980PTC004266

Company & Directors' Information:- V-TECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72100MH2000PTC127157

Company & Directors' Information:- J D ALLOY STEEL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U27106CH1981PTC004509

Company & Directors' Information:- C-TECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72900DL1995PTC070765

Company & Directors' Information:- T B TECH PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70100DL1986PTC023103

Company & Directors' Information:- R C STEEL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28112AS1980PTC001811

Company & Directors' Information:- STEEL TECH PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28112KL1979PTC003100

Company & Directors' Information:- DAGA & COMPANY PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U67120WB1993PTC059904

Company & Directors' Information:- B D K ALLOY PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U27106KA1973PTC002355

Company & Directors' Information:- P D STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1989PTC038426

Company & Directors' Information:- A K STEEL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1961PTC003566

Company & Directors' Information:- H S P STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27100MH2013PTC242983

Company & Directors' Information:- D H STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27109RJ2012PTC039742

Company & Directors' Information:- V TECH CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900PN2012PTC145814

Company & Directors' Information:- R A STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909MH2014PTC253625

Company & Directors' Information:- R. S. TECH PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202MH2010PTC207142

Company & Directors' Information:- N. V. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27310DL2009PTC186541

Company & Directors' Information:- K. D. STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28939DL2012PTC244467

Company & Directors' Information:- STEEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00349KA1958PTC001309

Company & Directors' Information:- STEEL CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51109WB1947PTC015981

    Civil Revision Petition No. 760 of 2020

    Decided On, 19 October 2020

    At, High Court of for the State of Telangana

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD

    For the Petitioner: M/s. Muddu Vijai, Advocate. For the Respondent: Laxminarayana Alishetty, Advocate.



Judgment Text

1. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, was directed against the order dated 12.3.2020 passed in I.A.No.2144 of 2019 in O.S.No.445 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, wherein and whereby the trial Court allowed the said I.A. filed by the respondent / defendant seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner.2. The facts germane for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition, in nutshell, are that the revision petitioner filed the suit against the respondent for perpetual injunction contending that the respondent is interfering with its possession. Upon institution of the suit, the revision petitioner was granted an adinterim injunction in its favour. While the things stood thus, the respondent filed I.A.No.2144 of 2019 in O.S.No.445 of 2018 to survey the suit schedule property i.e. land in Sy.No.352/A1 admeasuring Ac.1-20 guntas situated at Nandigama village and to verify the survey number and demarcate the suit schedule property along with the respondent’s land in Sy.No.352/A2 admeasuring Ac.1-20 guntas with the help of Mandal Surveyor and village map. The revision petitioner contested the said petition. However, upon considering the material available on record and the contentions of both sides, the trial Court allowed the said I.A appointing an Advocate Commissioner for the said purpose. Hence the present Civil Revision Petition.3. Heard Sri Muddu Vijai, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner / plaintiff and Sri Laxminarayana Alishetty, the learned counsel for the respondent / defendant and perused the record.4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner / plaintiff submitted that the trial Court cannot appoint advocate commissioner in the suit filed by the revision petitioner for injunction to collect evidence or to ascertain the possession of any of the parties over the suit schedule property. He further submitted that the respective parties have to establish their possession over the suit schedule property basing upon their evidence. He further submitted that the impugned order clearly amounts to collection of evidence regarding possession of the parties. It is his further submission that the impugned order does not establish any finding showing the reasons on the basis of which the trial Court arrived at a conclusion to allow the petition filed by the respondent / defendant. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has relied upon the ratio laid down in Arvind Kumar Agarwal vs. Legend Estates (P) Ltd., rep. by its Managing Partner, Kokapet Village, Ranga Reddy District (2015 (2) ALT 484) and Chekuri Lavanya vs. Kalidindi Ravi Kumar Verma (2015 (5) ALT 329).5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent / defendant submitted that the revision petitioner is illegally trying to construct a compound wall on the land of the respondent which is abutting the revision petitioner’s land, though in a different survey number and distinctly identifiable on ground. Thus, under the garb of ad-interim injunction orders, the revision petitioner itself is trying to encroach upon the respondent’s land, which forced the respondent / defendant to file a petition seeking to appoint Advocate Commissioner and the trial Court has rightly allowed the petition, which does not warrant interference of this Court. The learned counsel for the respondent has relied on the ratio laid down in Haryana Waqf Board vs. Shanti Sarup (2008) 8 SCC 671), Badana Mutyalu vs. Palli Appalaraju (2013 (5) ALD 376), and Smt. P. Sreedevi vs. IVLN Venkata Lakshmi Narasimha Prasad (2020 (4) ALT 433 (DB) (TS).6. Now the point for consideration is can there be an order of appointing Advocate Commissioner in the suit for injunction.7. POINT: Admittedly, the lands of both parties are abutting each other and they are in equal extents. The land of the revision petitioner is situated in Sy.No.351/A1, whereas the land of the respondent is situated in Sy.No.352/A2.8. No doubt, normally in a suit for injunction simplicitor, the court cannot appoint advocate commissioner since it would amount to collection of evidence in favour of one of the parties. But when there is a specific dispute with regard to the boundaries, and one party is trying to encroach upon the other party’s land, the Court can appoint advocate commissioner in order to put a quietus to the litigation. When this Court has questioned the learned counsel for the revision petitioner / plaintiff as to whether the plaintiff under the garb of injunction orders is encroaching the land of the respondent / defendant on the Northern side of the boundaries indicated in the suit schedule, the learned counsel specifically denied that he is not encroaching. Thus it can be construed that the revision petitioner / plaintiff is not encroaching nor has any interest upon the property of the respondent/defendant.9. Even according to the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, in Arvind Kumar Agarwal case (1 supra), in cases where there is a serious dispute regarding identity of the property or boundaries thereof, an Advocate Commissioner can be appointed even in the suits filed for injunction. Moreover, in a suit for mere injunction, the prayer would be to restrain the other party from interfering with its possession over the suit schedule property. Here, the case of both parties is that their properties are situated in two different survey numbers. In the case on hand, the contention of the respondent / defendant is that the revision petitioner itself is trying to construct a compound wall in his property, which is in a different survey number. Therefore, the intention of the Court below in appointing the advocate commissioner is to demarcate the two different survey numbers, but not to ascertain or cause any enquiry as to who is in possession of which property. Therefore, it does not amount to collection or fishing of evidence. Nowhere in the counter affidavit filed before the court below nor in the grounds of revision or the affidavit, has the revision petitioner asserted that it is not encroaching upon the land of the respondent /defendant. As rightly observed by the trial Court in the impugned order that when there is an attempt on the part of one of the parties to alter the physical features of the suit schedule property and it is necessary to take note of the same, it is always open to the court to appoint a commissioner for inspect

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ion of the suit schedule property with the help of the Tahsildar / Mandal Surveyor and village map.10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principle enunciated in the cases cited supra, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order appointing Advocate Commissioner does not suffer from any irregularity or impropriety, warranting interference of this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and accordingly the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed.11. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall also stand dismissed.
O R