HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:5150 OF 2011 ORDER: This revision is filed by the petitioner-plaintiff against the order dated 6.9.2011 passed in I.A.No.308 of 2009 in O.S.No.1022 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor. The petitioner-plaintiff filed the above application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of advocate-Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule house property and correct its boundaries and measurements with reference to registered sale deed dated 20.7.1998 referred in the written statement, rough sketch and also with reference to the property of the 1st defendant covered under registered sale deeds dated 29.12.2001 and 23.12.1995. It is stated in the affidavit that the plaintiff purchased house under a registered sale deed dated 20.7.1998 with specific boundaries and measurements and since then they are residing in the said house and subsequently, the 1st defendant purchased the house and vacant site from the 2nd defendant under registered Sale deed dated 29.12.2001 by mentioning four items of property with specific boundaries and measurements, out of which, items 2 to 4 are wrongly mentioned and that the 1st defendant also purchased vacant site from the 2nd defendant under a registered sale deed dated 23.12.1995 with specific boundaries and that the 1st defendant disputed the boundaries of the plaint schedule property. The Court below dismissed the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. It is the specific case of the petitioner-plaintiff that the 1st defendant denied the boundaries mentioned in the schedule. The material on record goes to show that the petitioner-plaintiff filed the main suit in O.S.No:1022 of 2007 seeking for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from interfering in any manner with her peaceful possession. According to the petitioner- plaintiff, she has purchased the schedule property under a registered sale deed, dated 20.7.1998. The suit is for injunction simplicitor and in a case of this nature, the plaintiff has to stand on her own legs by adducing evidence at the time of trial with reference to the boundaries basing on the alleged sale deed, but not on the weakness of the other side. Considering the nature of the proceedings and the nature of relief sought for by the petitioner-plaintiff in the application, I am of the opinion that the appointment of the commissioner amounts to gathering of material evidence. Therefore, the order under revision does not warrant interference and the revision petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ Justice N.V. Ramana Dated:9.12.2011 Nn. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No: 5150 OF 2011 9.12.2011 Nn