1 wp1832.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1832 OF 2011 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. V.B. Deshmukh, advocate for petitioners. 1. The petitioners claimed injunction against the respondents-defendants. The respondents came up with a case that petitioners are not entitled to alluvial land. Trial Court has found the appointment of Court Commissioner on their application necessary. Learned Counsel has urged that the respondents are encroacher and hence such appointment of Commissioner at their instance, is unwarranted. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported at "AIR 1996 Karnataka 257" ( Puttappa V/s Ramappa). 2. I find that the respondents-defendants are disputing their status as encroacher and are trying to establish that they are in possession of alluvial land with contention that the petitioners are not entitled to the same. I do not see any prejudice would be caused to the petitioners because of appointment of Commissioner. Petition is therefore 2 wp1832.11 rejected. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 21.03.2011 gas/wp1832.11