THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4364 of 2010 ORDER: The respondent herein filed O.S.No.134 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Thambalapalle. The petitioners herein, who are the defendants in the suit are opposing the suit. They allege that the land was assigned to Janam Pullannagari Ramappa, who sold the same to the first defendant; that they dug a bore well and that they are in possession and cultivating the land. The suit is coming up for trial. At this stage, the petitioners filed I.A No.176 of 2009 under Order XXVI Rule 9 read with Section 94(e) and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the property. By the impugned order dated 3.3.2010, the same was dismissed. This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed against the order in I.A. No. 176 of 2009. This Court heard the counsel for the petitioner. In spite of vehement submission that the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to notice that there is a bore well in the land in possession of the petitioners is essential, this Court is not inclined to countenance the submission. It is well settled that in a suit for injunction, ordinarily, Advocate Commissioner cannot be appointed to collect evidence. Whether there is a bore well in the land allegedly in possession of the petitioners is certainly a disputed question of fact, which is to be proved by the petitioners, if they rely on such disputed and relevant questions of fact, see Arredla Ram Reddy v. Arredla Alivelamma[1] and Penta Urmila v. Karukola Kumaraswamy[2]. The trial Court has correctly appreciated the facts and law and no interference is called for. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S. RAO,J) 18th November, 2010 pnb [1] 2004 (5) ALD 388 [2] 2005(2) ALD 130