IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4348 OF 2009 BETWEEN: Mohd. Abdul Muneem @ Hai Seeth S/o.late M.A. Raheem …. Petitioner AND Mohd. Abdul Nayeem Zakee S/o. late M.A. Raheem and Others …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4348 OF 2009 ORDER: (per Honourable Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 21-08-2009 in O.P. No.823 of 2005 passed by the learned III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad appointing an Advocate Commissioner to record the cross-examination of RWs.3 and 4 in the above O.P. 2. The revision petitioner filed the O.P. seeking to set aside the Arbitration Award dated 02-07-2004 passed by respondent Nos.7, 8 and 9. He contends that the evidence of the petitioner and the contesting respondents was completed and at that stage, the impugned order was passed without any application being filed by the respondents. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the provisions laid down under Order-XVIII Rules-4 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Code are not applicable to the arbitration proceedings. 4. The respondents are represented by their respective counsel and disputed the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. A perusal of the impugned order goes to show that no application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner has been referred to in the order and it appears that the Court below appointed the Advocate Commissioner to record the cross-examination of RWs.3 and 4 therein, fixing his fee at Rs.2,000/- to each witness, totaling to Rs.4,000/-, payable by the respondents directly, directing to submit his report by 06-10-2009. 6. As the order impugned was passed by the Court below without any application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner by the respondents, we are of the opinion that the same cannot be sustained in law and is liable to be set aside. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 21-08-2009 in O.P. No.823 of 2005 passed by the learned III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. No order as to costs. __________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J ____________________ G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J October 13, 2009. KTL