sanctioned plan, which was referable to the proceedings dated 12.08.2010 of the Municipal Corporation, Nizamabad. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that in violation of the said undertaking, constructions were made. Therefore, the only way to ascertain whether the constructions were made in deviation of the undertaking or in accordance with the sanctioned plan, which was the subject matter before this Court in C.R.P.No.2845 of 2011, was appointing an Advocate-Commissioner or an Authorised Engineer, to verify and record the same. Learned Principal Junior Civil Judge had taken this aspect into consideration and rightly appointed the AdvocateCommissioner, to conduct spot inspection, note down the physical features and verify whether proposed construction of the building (apartment) in the suit schedule property is as per the sanctioned plan submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of A.P., Hyderabad in CR.P.No.2845 of 2011 and the undertaking given by the petitioner, with the assistance of the Authorised Engineer I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order, as the main dispute in the suit itself is that the building construction is being proceeded with, by the defendants therein, in violation of the rights of the plaintiffs and obstructing the free flow of air and light. The issue as to whether the construction is in conformity with the sanctioned plan or there were changes made in the sanctioned plan by the competent authority and if so, they cause any inconvenience and damage to the plaintiffs, is required to be adjudicated in the suit, as it is the very subject matter of the suit. In that view of the matter, I refrain to make any observations with regard to the same. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. The miscellaneous petition filed in this revision shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
