not correct and the plaintiff has not shown the clear picture therein and the plaint schedule property is not a vacant site as contended by the plaintiff and on the otherhand, the plaint schedule property is in an extent of 108 square yards covered by Survey No.325 with house No.320 and the house constructed by the defendant is located therein and the plaintiff with the aid of interim injunction, is trying to demolish the said property and infact, he made attempts to demolish the property and the defendant gave report to police, which was registered as Crime No.24 of 2016, of Dindi police station for the offences under Section 447, 427, 323, 504, 188 r/w 34 IPC and the police after investigation filed charge sheet against the respondent/plaintiff (A4) and three others on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Devarakaonda and case was taken cognizance and registered as C.C.No.292 of 2017 and in view of the fact that the respondent/plaintiff has made attempts to demolish the structures existing on the suit schedule property, it is imperative and eminent for appointment of a Commissioner to localize the suit schedule property and note the physical features with the assistance of the surveyor. He placed reliance on the decision of this Court in N.Savitramma and another v. B.Changa Reddy1 , to buttes his contention that in cases whether there is a threat of obliteration of physical features of the suit property, the court can appoint a
