ART. 63] DESIGNATION OF BOUNDARIES. 1457

adjoining land owned by the defendant. This section compared with section

7. Filston Farm Co. v. Henderson, 106 Md. 374.

Where two lots though contiguous, are wholly distinct, and the buildings
are not located on the smaller lot, which is not necessary for the ordinary
and useful purposes of the buildings, the latter will not be sold in enforcing
the lien. Fulton v. Parlett, 104 Md. 71.

Cited but not construed in Beehler v. Ijams, 72 Md. 195.

See sec. 15 and notes.

1904, art. 63, sec. 5. 1888, art. 63, sec. 5. 1860, art. 61, sec. 5.
1838, ch. 205, sec. 4.

5. The owner of any lot or farm who may be desirous of erecting
any building or of contracting with any person for the erection thereof
may define in writing the boundaries of the lot or land or curtilage
appurtenant to such building previously to the commencement thereof
and file the same with the clerk of the circuit court for the county, or
of the superior court of Baltimore city, as the case may be, for record,
and such designation of boundaries shall be obligatory upon all persons
concerned.

Where the owner fails to avail himself of this section, or of sections 6 or

8. the decree will not be reversed because more land was directed to be
sold than was necessary for the ordinary and useful purposes of the build-
ings. Fulton v. Parlett, 104 Md. 70.

Cited but not construed in Filston Farm Co. v. Henderson, 106 Md. 373.

Ibid. sec. 6. 1888, art. 63, sec. 6. 1860, art. 61, sec. 6. 1838, ch. 205, sec. 5.
1845, ch. 287, sec. 6.

6. In default of such designation of boundaries previous to the
commencement of any building, it shall be lawful for the owner of
such lot or piece of ground, or for any person having a lien upon the
same by mortgage, judgment or otherwise, or entitled to a lien by virtue
of this article, to apply by petition in writing to the judge of the circuit
court for the county or the superior court of the city of Baltimore to
designate the boundaries.

Cited but not construed in Nicolai v. Baltimore, 100 Md. 585.

See notes to sections 5 and 7.

Ibid. sec. 7. 1888, art. 63, sec. 7. 1860, art. 61, sec. 7. 1838, ch. 205, sec. 6.

7. It shall be the duty of said court to issue an order to the county
or city surveyor or some other surveyor to examine the building or
place at which such building is being erected and to make a report to
such court, in which he shall sufficiently designate and describe by
metes and bounds with their courses and distances, and by a draft if
necessary, the limits and extent of grounds necessary for the convenient
use of such building for the purpose for which it was designed and
such report shall be entered at length upon the record book hereinafter
mentioned and if approved by the court shall be conclusive upon all
persona concerned.

Where a petition is filed under section 6 as a part of a pending Hen case,
and the surveyor's report is not acted on until the final decree in such
case, the report may be reviewed on appeal. This section and the word
"designed" as used therein, construed. Filston Farm Co. v. Henderson, 106
Md. 372.

Cited but not construed in Fulton v. Parlett. 104 Md. 70; Nicolai v. Balti-
more, 300 Md. 585.