THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No.5587 of 2011 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the order dated 16.11.2011 made in I.A.No.855 of 2010 in I.A.No.808 of 2010 in O.S.No.3654 of 2010 by the learned VI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2 The petitioner herein who is the plaintiff in the said suit filed the I.A.No.855 of 2010 to appoint an advocate commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property and to know as to whether the set back is maintained by the petitioner herein from four corners of the suit schedule property. In the suit, both plaintiff and the defendant are making counter claims against each other. In fact, the first respondent herein has also filed another I.A.No.911 of 2010 in the very same suit seeking for the very same relief. 3 The trial court having heard the counsel for the parties allowed both the applications and appointed advocate commissioner by a common order dated 16.11.2011 to note down the physical features of plaint schedule property and as to whether the setback is maintained by the respondent herein from four corners of suit schedule property and the commissioner is also directed to note down the physical features, note down the measurements, take photographs as well as conduct local enquiry of the schedule property in I.A.No.911 of 2010 after issuing notices to both parties after obtaining work memos if any. 4 The grievance of the petitioner is that the trial court ought not to have directed the advocate commissioner to conduct local enquiry. 5 Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC reads as under: “In any suit in which the Court deems a local investigation to be requisite or proper for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute, or of ascertaining the market value of any property, or the amount of any mesne profits or damages or annual net profits, the Court may issue a commission to such person as it thinks fit directing him to make such investigation and to report thereon to the Court.” 6 In the light of the said provision of law, I do not find any irregularity committed by the trial court in passing the aforesaid order since the very purpose of appointing an advocate commissioner is to make a local investigation of the schedule property. Local investigation does not mean doing any enquiry or collecting any evidence. The job of the Commissioner is to record the features prima facie existing on the schedule property. 7 In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ------------------------------ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 23.12.2011 Kvsn