HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.858 of 2009 Dated 30-11-2010 Between: Gudipati Narayanamma. …Petitioner. And: Muvvala Tatarao. …Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.858 of 2009 ORDER: This application is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.3407 of 2003 seeking appointment of advocate commissioner to record the evidence of plaintiff. The said application was dismissed by the impugned document order dated 9-2-2009 by the trial court on the ground that previously the plaintiff had filed such an application which was already dismissed and thereafter, the petitioner filed the present application but the doctor’s certificate is not satisfactory. Heard both the learned counsel. Though the learned counsel for the respondent points out several attempts to delay, resorted to by the petitioner as is evident from the chronology briefly referred to in C.R.P.No.3580 of 2008 disposed of today; it shows that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed the suit for injunction in 2003 but is evincing no interest. Affidavit filed in support of the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff shows that though previous application of the petitioner for appointment of Advocate Commissioner was dismissed, she has subsequently shifted to Adoni in Kurnool District and is undertaking treatment for ailment of Asthma which is certified by the Government Doctor. Counter filed by the respondent in the said application is mainly concentrated on the previous conduct of the petitioner. The apprehension of the respondent appears to be that if the petitioner is allowed to be examined on commission at Adoni, she is likely to implicate the respondent in a criminal case. I am unable to find any substance in the said apprehension. It is no doubt true that previous application of the petitioner for similar relief was rejected but the present application is moved on changed circumstances. In view of shifting to Adoni, Kurnool District, petitioner being aged lady of more than 65 years is not in dispute and medical condition is certified by the Government Doctor whose certificate was produced before the lower Court. Obviously under the impugned order, though the court below accepts that the said certificate in original is filed, no weight is attached to it. Even otherwise, under order 18 Rule 4 C.P.C., examination of parties on commission is the expeditious method found in the scheme of C.P.C. I, therefore, see no impediment for permitting the petitioner to be examined on commission. This Civil Revision Petition is allowed accordingly. Impugned order is set aside. Since the suit is of the year 2003 and for various reasons, disposal was delayed till now, the Court below shall now appoint advocate commissioner requiring him to complete the examination of the petitioner in one or two sittings and thereafter, complete the trial on day to day basis and dispose of the suit on or before 31-3-2011. No costs. Office to communicate the copy of order to the trial Court within one week along with the records if any. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 30-11-2010 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.858 of 2009 Dated 30-11-2010