HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.767 of 2011 Date: June 8, 2011 Between: Kota Sakuntala, W/o.late Kota Gangadharam, Hindu, aged 46 years, R/o.Ranganayakulapet, Nellore, Nellore District … Petitioner And Chandaluru Swarajyam, W/o.Kesava Rao, aged 40 years, Hindu, R/o.10/94, Sudarsanamvari Street, Santhapeta, Nellore and others … Respondents Order: This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed aggrieved of the order dated 02-11-2010 passed in I.A.No.592 of 2010 in O.S.No.388 of 2007 by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC) Nellore. Petitioner herein is the first defendant in the said suit. She filed an application for appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner to record evidence of a witness on her behalf. The Advocate-Commissioner has filed report stating that witness is unable to speak and is bedridden, but when the document was shown to the witness he has gestured that the signature on the document belongs to him. The court below, holding that the said report of the Advocate- Commissioner is beyond the scope of the warrant, by the impugned order, ordered to eschew the evidence recorded by the Advocate-Commissioner. In this revision petition, it is submitted that only on the ground that there are objections on the report submitted by the Advocate-Commissioner, evidence cannot be eschewed. As much as it is not in dispute that the very report of the Advocate-Commissioner makes it clear that witness is unable to speak, the said report is beyond the scope of the warrant issued. When the witness was unable to speak at all, the Advocate-Commissioner could not have filed a report stating that the witness, by way of gestures, indicated that the signature on the document is his. In the circumstances, the court below rightly eschewed the evidence recorded by the Advocate-Commissioner. In that view of the matter, I see no infirmity in the impugned order of the court below to interfere with the same in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Civil revision is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) June 8, 2011 MRR