THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2442 OF 2011 DATED:05.08.2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 03.06.2011, in I.A.No.222 of 2006 in O.S.No.3 of 2006 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Peddapalli, Karimnagar, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to measure the land in Sy.No.514 and fix boundaries in Sy.Nos.515/A and 515/AA with the assistance of a Mandal Surveyor, was dismissed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff. None appeared for the respondents 3 to 5 though served with notices. Perused the records. 3. Petitioner herein filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule land of 0.10 guntas situate in Sy.No.515/A and 515/AA of Endapalli village. He claims to have purchased the suit land from the defendants 1 and 2. Defendants 3 to 5 filed written statement contesting the suit. According to them, they are having 0.20 guntas of land in Sy.No.514, which is adjoining Sy.No.515 and that part of the land, which the plaintiff is claiming to be in possession, pertains to Sy.No.514 belonging to the defendants. According to the plaintiff, no part of the suit land is situated in Sy.No.514. Thus, there is a boundary dispute between the plaintiff and the defendants. Plaintiff filed I.A.No.222 of 2006 seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure the land and fix the boundary with the help of a Mandal Surveyor. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court observing that the plaintiff cannot be permitted to gather evidence under the guise of local inspection by the Advocate Commissioner. 4. It is to be noted that the plaintiff is claiming to be in possession of the suit land, which according to him is situate in Sy.Nos.515/A and 515/AA, whereas the defendant contends that part of the suit land is also within the limits of Sy.No.514 and is in their possession. The appointment of Advocate Commissioner for making local inspection of the suit land in Sy.No.515/A and 515/AA and the adjacent land situate in Sy.No.514 and fixing the boundary between the two survey numbers with the help of a Mandal Surveyor, would certainly assist the Court in resolving the real dispute between the parties in an effective and comprehensive manner. 5. In a decision reported in MOHAMMED MAHMOOD ALI v. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SURYAPET, NALGONDA DISTRICT, REP. BY COMMISSIONER/SPECIAL OFFICER AND OTHERS[1], this Court held that when the dispute is boundary dispute, it would be just and proper to appoint a Commissioner to locate the land by taking measurements with reference to revenue records. 6. In a decision reported in SALLA ESWARAMMA v. C.SUBBA REDDY[2], it was held that Advocate Commissioner can be appointed even in injunction suit if local investigation is required for elucidating any matter in dispute. 7. In VARALA RAMACHANDRA REDDY v. MEKALA YADI REDDY AND OTHERS[3], this Court held that Advocate Commissioner can be appointed in injunction suit for local inspection of suit site and to demarcate suit property with the help of a surveyor and dismissal of petition on the ground that it amounts to gathering evidence with regard to possession is not justified. 8. In the present case also, though the suit is filed for injunction, in view of the boundary dispute between the parties, the Commissioner’s report, fixing the boundary between the land in Sy.No.515 and the adjoining land in Sy.No.514, would assist the Court in rendering substantial justice between the parties by resolving the real dispute between them in an effective manner. 9. In the circumstances, it is held that the impugned order refusing to appoint the Commissioner, is liable to be set aside and the same is accordingly set aside. The trial Court is directed to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to make local inspection of the suit land situate in Sy.Nos.515/A and 515/AA and also adjoining land in Sy.No.514 and fix the boundary between the two with the help of a Mandal Surveyor and fix reasonable remuneration for the Advocate Commissioner. 10. Civil Revision Petition is allowed as stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 05th August, 2011. Tsy [1] 2008 (5) ALT 797 [2] 2009 (2) ALT 59 [3] 2010 (4) ALD 198