HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.3943 of 2009 Dated 15.04. 2011 Between: Kontham Narsing Rao. …Petitioner. And: Pratap Reddy and others. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.3943 of 2009 ORDER: Heard both the learned counsel. Petitioner claims to be the owner of Ac.11.22 Guntas in S.No.222 of Pedda Shahpur Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. He filed the present suit O.S.No.710 of 2007 for perpetual injunction alleging the interference against the respondents. Earlier to the present suit, the respondents who claimed to be the owner of Ac.19.10 guntas in S.Nos.221, 225 and 240/A of the same village filed O.S.No.1663 of 2007 before the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, against the petitioner herein, also for permanent injunction alleging interference. It appears that the petitioner who claimed ownership of Ac.11.22 guntas in S.No.222, have no claim against the respondents’ land bearing S.Nos.221, 225 and 240/A and similarly, respondents also do not claim any land of the plaintiff in S.No.222. While the said two, suits for injunction with respect to respective suit schedule lands are pending before different Courts, respondents herein filed the present I.A.No.2135 of 2008 in O.S.No.710 of 2007 seeking appointment of advocate- commissioner to note down the physical features of the respondents’ land covered by S.Nos.221, 225 and 240/A. The said application was allowed by the Court below on the ground that physical features of both the properties are required to be noted by the Advocate Commissioner. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff has filed the present revision. It is clear from the averments of the petitioner as well as the respondents that both of them are claiming different lands and neither of them claimed the land of the other. The subject matter of the present suit O.S.No.710 of 2007 being only with respect to the alleged interference with the petitioner’s land, it is for the petitioner to establish his entitlement to the said relief including the allegation of interference. Both the suits, appear now ripe for trial and the present application by the respondents/defendants seeking appointment of advocate commissioner to note down the physical features of their land does not appear to be sustainable as the land claimed by the respondents is not the subject matter of the present suit and is in fact subject matter of the respondents’ suit O.S.No.1663 of 2007 referred to above. It is not found by the Court below that issue of identity of both the properties arose in the suit on the basis of respective pleadings and in that view of the matter, I am unable to sustain the impugned order as it would amount to requiring advocate commissioner to note down the physical features of property, which is not the subject matter of the present suit. The Revision Petition accordingly is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The Court below shall proceed with the trial of the suit as expeditiously as possible and complete the same on or before December, 2011. No costs. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 15.4. 2011 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.3943 of 2009 Dated 15.04. 2011