HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISON PETITION No. 3 OF 2010 Thursday, the Twenty Third Day of December, Two Thousand and Ten Between Nambaru Appalanarasamma and another Petitioners AND Abdul Rehman and another Respondents ORAL ORDER: The petitioners are the plaintiffs. They filed the suit OS No. 153 of 2006 for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. In the said pending suit, the petitioners filed IA No.859 of 2009 in OS No. 153 of 2006 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka under Order 26 Rule 9 read with Sec. 94(e) C.P.C. seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure and localise the plaint schedule property with reference to the sale deed of the petitioners/plaintiffs after measuring the land under the occupation of the respondents/defendants with the help of Mandal Surveyor. I am of the opinion that such an application is nothing but gathering evidence, which cannot be allowed. In such a nature of suit, the parties cannot be permitted to gather evidence. It is for the petitioners to independently establish their averments made in the plaint. Therefore, I do not see any legal infirmity in the order impugned, though the learned Senior Civil Judge dismissed the said application on some other untenable ground. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. It is always open for the petitioners/plaintiffs to establish their averments made in the plaint by leading appropriate oral and documentary evidence. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah December 23, 2010 MAS