THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1674 OF 2010 DT.5.8.2011 Between: Mukkamala Somasekhara Rao … Petitioner And Sheik Meeravali and ors … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Vijay Kiran Counsel for respondent: The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1674 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner herein is plaintiff in O.S. No. 289 of 2009 filed the present revision questioning the order dated 21.1.2010 passed in I.A. No. 1259 of 2009 in O.S. No. 289 of 2009 by the V Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, dismissing the application filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 read with Section 151 of CPC to appoint an advocate Commissioner to measure the suit land and to locate the same with the help of Government surveyor. The suit is filed for declaration of title and for recovery of possession of the suit schedule properties free from obstruction from the defendants after demolishing the structures therein. The defendants filed a written statement stating that the schedule of the property is not correct and the D.No. of the schedule property is not correct and it was wrongly mentioned as D No. 270, 272 but the correct number is 278 and that the defendants have title and possession over the suit schedule property since several years. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed the present application for appointment of advocate Commissioner to measure the suit land and to locate the same with the help of Government Surveyor, which was dismissed by the order under revision on the ground that onus is on the plaintiff to establish that he has valid title over the suit property. Hence, the present revision. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and perused the material available on record. It is now well settled that the plaintiff has to establish the plaint averments and pleadings by adducing evidence and cannot shift the burden of proving the same to the Advocate Commissioner. It is open for the petitioner to prove the plaint averments by obtaining necessary survey records from the concerned authorities and file the same and adduce evidence in support of his claim. In the circumstances of the case, the Court below has rightly dismissed the application and this Court does not see any infirmity warranting interference. The revision fails and accordingly the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 5.8.2011 tvk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1674 OF 2010 DATE: 5.8.2011