Smt. Kollipara Sumalatha vs Putta Kameswara Rao
2023 Latest Caselaw 5307 AP

           HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
               MAIN CASE: CRP No. 1907 of 2023

                            PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.     DATE                              ORDER                                         OFFICE
NO.                                                                                      NOTE

02.   04.11.2023   RNT, J

                          Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned senior
                   counsel, assisted by Sri Devi Prasad Mangalapuri,
                   learned counsel for the petitioner.
                          2.   The    petitioner        is    the     plaintiff    in
                   O.S.No.340 of 2020 filed for decree of permanent
                   injunction against the defendants. Petitioner filed
                   I.A.No.458 of 2021 for issue of commission under
                   Order 26 Rule 9 r/w. Section 151 CPC to appoint
                   an Advocate-Commissioner for localization of the
                   suit property, as also the property of the
                   defendants. On contest, the said application has
                   been rejected by order dated 11.05.2023 passed
                   by   the    II    Additional     Junior          Civil   Judge,
                   Rajamahendravaram .
                          3.   Challenging        the        impugned       order,
                   learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
                   the learned trial Court committed illegality in
                   rejecting the application. Placing reliance on the
                   judgment in the case of Varala Ramachandra
                   Reddy v. Mekala Yadi Reddy {reported in 2010
                   (4) ALD 198}, he submits that even in a suit for
                   permanent         injunction,             application          for
                   appointment of the Advocate-Commissioner is
                                        2



SL.   DATE                                 ORDER                               OFFICE
NO.                                                                             NOTE
             maintainable, and further placing reliance in the
             case of Haryana Waqf Board v. Shanti Sarup
             {reported in (2008) 8 SCC 671}, in which it was
             held that as that was a case of demarcation of
             the disputed land, it was appropriate for the
             Court to direct the investigation by appointing a
             local Commission under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC, he
             submits        that      the       order   for       Advocate-
             Commissioner should have been passed for
             demarcation of the disputed land, by the learned
             trial Court.
                    4. Matter requires consideration.
                    5. Issue notice to the respondents.

6. In addition to the normal mode of service, learned counsel for the petitioner on his request is permitted to take out personal notice for service on the respondents and file proof of service in the Registry by the next date.

7. List on 01.12.2023.

8. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of the O.S.No.340 of 2020 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram, shall remain stayed.

_________ RNT, J Dsr