B RAMADEVI Vs. A RAVINDRA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil revision petition is preferred by the petitioner aggrieved by the order dtd. 1/6/2016 passed in E.A.No.491 of 2015 in E.P.No.267 of 2008 in O.S No.193 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu (for short "the trial Court").

(2.) The impugned application has been filed by the petitioner before the trial Court under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner to note down the structures of E.P. schedule property and to bring all relevant documents concerning to it with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that earlier the petitioner filed E.A.No.491 of 2015 claiming right and title over the schedule mentioned property as he is absolute owner of the said property and the said property actually assigned by the Government in her favour and relevant records also mutated in that regard but the respondent who are nothing to do with the property and never in possession and enjoyment of property contended that the said property is a private land and made to litigate the same and for that purpose there is a requirement to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to make local inspection of the schedule property with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor so as to bring truth into the light and hence the petitioner filed the impugned I.A before the trial Court seeking appointment of advocate commissioner and the same was dismissed with costs. Aggrieved by the same the present civil revision petition came to be filed.