THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.912 OF 2008 DATED:19.04.2011 Between: Shegu Subba Rao & another. .... PETITIONERS And Nambala Satyanarayana. .... RESPONDENT ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 24.01.2008, in I.A.No.38 of 2008 in O.S.No.986 of 2003 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, wherein the said application filed by the respondent herein–plaintiff under Order XVI Rules 1 & 6 CPC seeking issuance of summons to the Mandal Surveyor, M.R.O. office, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam to produce F.M.B. and give evidence pertaining to the property situate in Sy.No.9/9, was allowed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared for the respondent. Perused the record. 3. Respondent herein filed the suit for mandatory injunction. Petitioner-defendant filed written statement contesting the suit. It is stated that the recording of evidence is completed and the matter is at the stage of hearing arguments. At that stage, respondent herein filed I.A.No.38 of 2008 seeking summons to the Mandal Surveyor to produce F.M.B. and also to give evidence as to whether the suit property is situate in Sy.No.9/9 or not. 4. According to the petitioners, the suit property is situate in Sy.No.9/7 and an Advocate Commissioner, who was appointed for local inspection, also filed a report to the same effect. Respondent-plaintiff contends that the said property is situate in Sy.No.9/9. In support of the same, he appears to have filed Ex.A2-xerox copy of the settlement Adangal. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the marking of the said document was objected to. Respondent therefore filed I.A.No.38 of 2008 for production of the original document, namely F.M.B. by the Mandal Surveyor and also to give evidence regarding the location of the suit land as to whether the same is situate in Sy.No.9/7 or 9/9. The said document and also the evidence of the Mandal Surveyor are certainly relevant for the purpose of deciding the dispute and therefore the impugned order, permitting the examination of the said witness, is not liable to be interfered with. 6. In the circumstances, respondent-plaintiff is permitted to examine the proposed witness i.e. the Mandal Surveyor, who shall also produce the relevant F.M.B. 7. In the result, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 19th April, 2011. Tsy