1 Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1499 OF 2010 Bumabi Mahiboob Shiledar & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs Hanmantrao Nilappa Patil & Ors. .. Respondents ­­ Shri Surel S. Shah for the Petitioners. Shri P.M. Mengane for Respondent No.1. ­­ CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 29TH APRIL 2010 P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1. 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to an order dated 6 th January, 2010 by which a Court Commissioner has been appointed for execution of a Sale Deed in an execution application. The execution application is for executing a decree for specific performance of contract of sale of immovable property. The 1 st Respondent is the decree holder and the Petitioners are the Judgment Debtors. 2 3. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge has appointed an Advocate as the Court Commissioner and he has been directed to execute the sale deed. The grievance of the Petitioners is that the procedure prescribed under Rule 34 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has not been followed and straightway the Court Commissioner has been directed to execute the sale deed. The learned counsel appearing for the 1 st Respondent  decree holder pointed out that the Application was made by the 1 st Respondent at Exhibit  61 in which he has stated that he was willing to produce the draft of the conveyance. 4. Before the Court Commissioner executes a conveyance, the procedure provided under Rule 34 of Order XXI of the said Code has to be followed to enable the judgment debtors to consider the draft conveyance and to submit their objections, if any. By the impugned order, a complete departure has been made from the provisions of Rule 34 of Order XXI of the said Code. Though the appointment of the Court Commissioner cannot be set aside, the impugned order will have to be modified by directing that the conveyance shall be executed only after following the aforesaid procedure. 3 5. Hence, the Petition is disposed of by passing the following order. (a) The impugned order dated 6 th January, 2010 is modified. (b) The appointment of the Court Commissioner for the execution of conveyance is hereby confirmed. However, the Trial Court is directed to follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 34 of Order XXI of the said Code. It is directed that only after the compliance is made with the requirements of Rule 34 of Order XXI of the said Code, the Court Commissioner will execute the conveyance. (c) The Petition is partly allowed in above terms with no orders as to costs. (d) All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open. (A.S.OKA, J)