Court Commissioner Appointment - Courts have the authority to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to take photographs or demarcate property when circumstances warrant, such as disputes over physical features, encroachment, or construction details. However, such appointment must be properly considered and legally justified; erroneous or premature appointments are challenged and may be deemed contrary to law. For instance, the Court in case Salveru Padmarao vs Varin and Varin Constructions (P) Ltd. - Telangana allowed an Advocate Commissioner without proper consideration, which was held to be contrary to law Salveru Padmarao vs Varin and Varin Constructions (P) Ltd. - Telangana.
Circumstances Warranting Appointment - Courts have appointed Advocate Commissioners to note physical features, demarcate properties, or verify encroachments, especially when disputes involve physical evidence like photographs, survey sketches, or property boundaries. The appointment is supported even after recording evidence if the case circumstances justify it, as seen in Vishnudas Manga Bhavani case Salveru Padmarao vs Varin and Varin Constructions (P) Ltd. - Telangana.
Limitations and Context - In some cases, courts clarified that in suits for injunctions, appointment of Advocate Commissioners is not typically for gathering evidence but may be used for elucidation if necessary, considering the case's nature. The appointment should align with the purpose, and unnecessary or improper appointments can be challenged C. Mamatha W/o. Subramanyam VS K. Parvathamma, W/o Late K. Reddeppa - Andhra Pradesh.
Specific Cases and Reports - Several instances show Advocate Commissioners filing reports with photographs, sketches, and demarcations, aiding courts in resolving disputes related to encroachment, property boundaries, or construction. These reports are integral to judicial decision-making Mohammed Iqbal Sait and 2 ot vs Abdul Kareem - Madras, Manisha Shetty VS Satya Sai Co-op Housing Society Ltd. , Thr. Its Secretary Mr. Puttuswamy Gudigar - Bombay, Dnyandeo P. Shinde VS Mahindra And Mahindra - Bombay (2010).
Authority and Procedure - The appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is generally within the court's discretion, but it must be exercised judiciously, considering the dispute's nature and legal standards. For example, in the case involving the Sabarimala temple, photographs and reports from commissioners supported orders to remove unauthorized installations Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala - Kerala.
Conclusion - Courts can appoint Advocate Commissioners to take photographs or demarcate property when justified by the case's facts, especially in disputes over physical features or encroachment. However, such appointments must be lawfully and properly considered; improper or unnecessary appointments can be challenged and set aside Salveru Padmarao vs Varin and Varin Constructions (P) Ltd. - Telangana, C. Mamatha W/o. Subramanyam VS K. Parvathamma, W/o Late K. Reddeppa - Andhra Pradesh, Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala - Kerala.
