THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4539 OF 2011 DT.29.10.2011 Between: Jonnadula Seshulu … Petitioner And Janjanam Siva Sankara Rao & another. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri B.Chinnapa Reddy Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4539 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner herein is the judgment-debtor filed this revision assailing the order dated 19-08-2011 passed in E.A.No.297 of 2011 in E.A.No.512 of 2009 in EP.No.93 of 2005 in OS.No.2 of 2001 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. It is stated that though the E.P schedule property actually is 96½ sq.yards, the E.P was filed for sale of 73 sq. yards only, therefore, the petitioner has filed EA.No.512 of 2009 under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Civil Procedure Code for redelivery of excess property. The petitioner to establish his contention in the said E.A512 of 2009, has filed another E.A.No.297 of 2011 under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure and note down the extent by noting down the physical features of the E.P schedule property with the assistance of the Mandal Surveyor or any other qualified Surveyor, and the said E.A.297 of 2011 was dismissed. Hence the revision. If really the property that sought to be sold was only 73 sq yards in execution of the decree though in fact the Amin had delivered 96 ½ sq yards, it is always open for the petitioner to establish his pleading by adducing independent evidence. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the merit or otherwise of the claim petition. The Advocate Commissioner except noting down the physical features cannot be allowed to measure the property with the assistance of the Mandal Surveyor. In view of the above, I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed. However, it is always open for the petitioner to establish his pleading that the property delivered was 93 ½ sq yards but not 73 sq yards by adducing appropriate evidence in the pending claim petition. No costs. _______________ (V.ESWARAIAH,J) DATE: 29.10.2011 grk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4539 OF 2011 DT.29.10.2011 GRK