IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.396 of 2025

18^th DAY OF MARCH, 2026 Between:

Guduru Sathi Reddy.

…Petitioner AND J. Sudhakar Reddy.

...Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Sri M. V. Hanumanth Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Srinivas Polavarapu, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the entire record.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred by the petitioner/respondent/plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2025 in I.A.No.437 of 2024 in O.S.No.13 of 2018 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Medchal, (‘trial Court’), wherein a petition filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 read with Section 75 of CPC, seeking appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to locate the suit schedule property and ascertain whether the suit land admeasuring Ac.0-20 guntas forms part of land admeasuring Ac.1-34 guntas in Survey No.332 of Thumukunta Village, Shamirpet Mandal, has been allowed by appointing an Advocate Commissioner to carry out necessary investigation except for ascertaining the possession of said property.

Background of facts:

3. The respondent/defendant herein filed a petition under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain whether the suit land admeasuring Ac.0-20 guntas forms part of land admeasuring Ac.1-34 guntas in Survey No.332 of Tumukunta Village, Shamirpet Mandal, by taking assistance of a Mandal Surveyor. According to the respondent, the suit is filed seeking permanent injunction claiming rights over land and admeasuring Ac.0-20 guntas in Survey No.332 of Tumukunta Village, Shamirpet Mandal. The petitioner claims to have purchased the said land under a sale deed bearing document bearing No.2977 of 1996. While so, the respondent is claiming rights in land admeasuring Ac.1-10 guntas in Survey No.332 out of Ac.1-34 guntas of Tumkuntha Village, Shamirpet Mandal, under a gift settlement deed bearing document No.9025 of 1990 from the principal vendor G. Nagireddy. According to the respondent, the suit schedule property is part and parcel of the land admeasuring Ac.1-10 guntas settled in favour of G. Nagireddy, who is brother of the petitioner. There is admission of P.W.1 that the south side of the suit schedule property belongs to their father G.Venkat Reddy in Survey No.332. Respondent's vendor G. Nagireddy acquired the property from his father G. Venkat Reddy in family partition. The respondent developed the property along with land in Survey No.286 by converting it into plots by laying internal roads in the year 2017. Some of the purchasers have constructed the houses and are living in their respective plots. Therefore, ownership and possession of the petitioner over the suit schedule property is denied. The petitioner obtained interim injunction and making attempts to block the road leading to Reddy Colony. The identity of the suit schedule land is in dispute. For the purpose of locating the suit schedule property and to ascertain whether it forms part of Ac.1-10 guntas claimed by the respondent, there is a need for appointment of Advocate Commissioner as such the respondent filed I.A. under revision.

4. The petitioner herein filed counter-affidavit before the trial Court claiming that the main suit is filed seeking perpetual injunction with respect to agricultural dry land administering Ac.0-20 guntas in Survey No.332 of Tumukunta Village, Shamirpet Mandal. In said suit, I.A.No.45 of 2018 was filed seeking ad interim injunction and the same was allowed. The respondent preferred C.M.A.No.13 of 2018 before the XI Additional District Judge at Medchal and the said C.M.A. was dismissed on 21.12.2021, confirming the order passed by the learned trial Court. The petitioner claims to be in possession under valid title. As such, denied any need for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. Further, it is urged that the r