THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5711 of 2010 ORDER: This revision arises out of the order dated 22.10.2010 in I.A.No.1234 of 2010 in I.A.No.3017 of 2009 in O.S.No.2630 of 2009 passed by the learned VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, whereby the Court below dismissed the I.A. filed by the petitioners herein for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to survey and note down the physical features of the suit schedule property, possessed by the respondent in the suit survey numbers with the help of the Surveyor of the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records. The respondent filed the suit for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property against the petitioners. The petitioners/defendants filed the I.A. for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features. The petitioners/defendants pleaded before the Court below that the respondent/plaintiff illegally occupied the land belonging to first petitioner/first defendant and that suppressing the said fact, the respondent/plaintiff filed the suit and therefore, appointment of Advocate Commissioner helps to know the factual aspects. The respondent/plaintiff pleaded before the Court below that appointment of Advocate Commissioner is not warranted since all the facts are pleaded in the plaint and that the share claimed by the respondent/plaintiff is reflected from the relevant entries in the revenue records. The Court below, on hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, held that it is the duty of the petitioners/defendants to establish their possession over the suit schedule property and not on the report given by the Commissioner. It is the discretionary power of the Court to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for any purpose depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case. It means if any party seeks to appoint of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the property, it shall satisfy the Court for doing so and not as a matter of right. The Court below taking into consideration all the aspects of the matter, in my view rightly, dismissed the I.A. and therefore, the impugned order warrants no interfere. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________________ N.V. RAMANA, J 24th December, 2010 GHN