Judgment 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the plaintiff, challenging the fair and decretal order dated 21.03.2014 made in I.A.42 of 2014 in O.S.No.388 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore. 2. The petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.42 of 2014 in O.S.No.388 of 2010 seeking for appointment of Advocate Commissioner and the same was dismissed by the Court below by an order dated 21.03.2014. 3. A perusal of the order would go to show that this application was filed after the evidence was over and when the case was posted for arguments. The application for appointment of Commissioner has been filed to find out whether the property in lying in survey number 211/7 or 211/6. 3.1. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the Court below should have allowed the petition in the interest of justice. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that a Commissioner cannot be appointed to gather evidence and that too after the evidence was closed on both sides and therefore the order of the Court below dismissing the petition is justified. 5. The belated filing of the application at the stage of arguments discloses the intention of the plaintiff to drag on the proceedings. The application for appointment of Commissioner should have been filed before the closure of the plaintiffs evidence. No reasons has been stated as to why it was not filed at the earliest point of time. Hence, the dismissal of the petition is justified. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.