(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 2241 OF 2011 Shaikh Anis s/o. Shaikh Ibrahim, Age : 47 years, Occupation : Business, R/o. Asha Hotel, Jintur Road, .. Petitioner Parbhani. (Original plaintiff) versus Gopalrao s/o. Anantrao Sawrikar, Age : 70 years, Occupation : Pensioner, R/o. Vidya Nagar, Parbhani, .. Respondents and 3 others. (Original defendants) ....................... Mr. Swapnil S. Rathi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent no.4. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23RD MARCH 2011 (2) COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard Adv. Mr. S.S. Rathi, for the petitioner, and learned Addl. G.P. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, for respondent no.4. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 22-12-2010, passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Parbhani, below Exhibit 171 in Special Civil Suit No. 25/2005, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of court commissioner. 3. Adv. Mr. Rathi points out that rejection of application, on the ground that earlier application was rejected, is erroneous. According to him, earlier application was rejected and it was found to be premature. 4. After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner / plaintiff, as also, respondent / defendant have concluded their respective evidence. Thereafter, this application has been moved. Purpose is again, to bring on record, material to demonstrate possession of petitioner / plaintiff. Therefore, again effort is to collect evidence through commissioner. (3) 5. When both sides have concluded their evidence, it is apparent that such prayer made only for collection of evidence cannot be entertained. However, trial court can always, if it finds any ambiguity, take recourse to appropriate provisions in this respect. 6. No perversity could be found with the view taken by the trial court so as to warrant interference in this jurisdiction. 7. In the result, the petition is dismissed. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp2241