THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH C.R.P.NO.1347 OF 2011 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.415/2008 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nellore, for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property, which is a house site, in an extent of 100 ankanams, comprising of a terraced room in an extent of 2 ankanams in plot bearing nos.565-A, 565-B and 565-C of Nellor Bit-I, Nellore Rural mandal, Kothur village, Nellore. Defendants filed I.A.No.1461/2010 in OS.No.415/2008, seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner. By docket order dated 8.3.2011, the court below appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit schedule property and also police colony and to fix the boundaries with the help of Mandal Surveyor. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed the present revision. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff submitted that in a suit for permanent injunction, advocate commissioner cannot be appointed and if the commissioner is appointed, it amounts to collection of evidence and the same is not permissible under law. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants submitted that the suit schedule property belongs to 3rd defendant and the Irrigation Department and the plaintiff encroached over an extent of 100 ankanams, out of which 50 ankanams in S.No.2157/1 and 50 extents in 2157/2, which is a channel poramboke, with false and frivolous documents. He contended that there is no bar to appoint an advocate commissioner, even in a suit for permanent injunction. He stated that if the Advocate Commissioner is appointed only to inspect and fix the boundaries over the suit schedule property, it will assist the court in disposal of the case in accordance with law. 5. From a perusal of the impugned order, it could be seen that the court below passed a cryptic order and no reasons are assigned for appointing an advocate commissioner. Therefore, in these circumstances, without going into the merits of the respective contentions, it is expedient to remit the matter to the court below. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside the matter is remitted back to the court below to pass an appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law. 7. The revision is accordingly disposed of. No costs. AVS ------------------------------- 29—09—2011