1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 625 OF 2010 (Smt. Bayabai wd/o Madhukar Adhavu & Ors. vs. Smt. Anusayabai @ Bayabai Krishnarao Gawande & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. MARCH 12, 2010. Heard Shri Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Chitnavis, learned counsel for the respondents. Respondent No.1, who has already a map and report of TILR in her favour, applied for appointment of Commissioner under Order 26, Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code, alleging abuse of temporary injunction order and to demarcate boundaries as the petitioner – plaintiff has been given temporary injunction. The trial Court has by the impugned order appointed TILR only as Commissioner for said purpose. Shri Naidu, learned counsel has pointed out that that demarcation by TILR was behind the back of the petitioners and is not final yet because the order of Sub-Divisional Officer in appeal is in favour of Respondent No.1 and against that order, the petitioners have approached the Deputy Collector in Second Appeal. The Deputy Collector has stayed that order during the 2 pendency of suit and aggrieved by it, Respondent No.1 has filed Revision before the Additional Commissioner. That revision is pending. Mrs. Chitnavis, learned counsel, on the other hand, states that because of order of temporary injunction, as actual position on site is being disturbed, the demarcation becomes necessary and because of grievance of the petitioners against earlier map drawn allegedly behind their back, the fresh map through TILR was sought for. After hearing both the learned counsel, it is seen that at present the orders of revenue authorities have not attained finality. In any case, those orders are not binding on Civil Court. The Civil Court has to independently apply its mind. The map in favour of Respondent No. 1 is already on record and subsequent orders passed by revenue authorities are also on record. In the circumstances, when the Civil Court is at the stage of recording of evidence, I find it convenient to direct the Civil Court to proceed further with recording of evidence and attempt to decide the Civil Suit itself as early as possible. If after recording of such evidence, Civil Court or any of the parties find it necessary to appoint the Commissioner for the purposes of demarcation, the Court as also parties are at liberty to move for such appointment. With this clarification, the impugned order is quashed and set aside with liberty to the parties as 3 mentioned above. Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule accordingly. However, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.