1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1896 OF 2010 Shashikant V.Jadhav (Through his legal heirs) & Ors. ...Petitioners vs. Smt.Laxmibai Ramchandra Diwan (Through her legal heirs) & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.G.K.Jadhav for the petitioners None for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : MARCH 17, 2010 P.C. 1 The petitioners made an application for appointment of the Court Commissioner under Rule 9 of Order XXVI of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. However, the trial Court has permitted the petitioner to take out photographs of the suit property. 2 The order impugned is purely interlocutory in nature which is capable of being challenged in the Appeal which may be preferred by the petitioner against the decree passed in the suit if it be adverse to the petitioner. Moreover, the impugned order does not take away the power of the trial Court to order local investigation under Rule 9 of Order XXVI of the said Code, if the trial Court comes to the conclusion that the local investigation is necessary. 3 Subject to what is observed above, writ petition is rejected. JUDGE