1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 939 0F 2010 *** Yuraj S/o Pandit Dhangar and others Versus Dilip S/o Eknath Koli and another *** 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Present petitioner is plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.91 of 2005 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chopada, district Jalgaon. Copy of the plaint Annexure-A is on record. Description of the property given is land Gat No.608 admeasurig 2 Hectares 9 Ares. Counsel for the Petitioner points out para 2 from the plaint. It has been contended in para 2 that the suit property is adjacent to the vicinity of Ghodgaon. It is ancestral property. In the suit property, there is a small portion which is used by the Petitioner as thrashing floor. There is also cattle shed as described in para 2 of the plaint. Respondent/ defendant is Gram Panchayat, Ghodgaon. This suit is for perpetual injunction and declaration. Counsel for the petitioner points out contention raised by the respondent/ defendant Gram Panchayat in the written statement/ reply to the temporary 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. injunction application. He points out para 6 from this written statement. During the pendency of this suit, application for appointment of Court Commissioner i.e. for local inspection, was filed by petitioner/ plaintiff under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure [the Code, for short], on 20th July, 2009. This application, after hearing the parties, is rejected by the trial Court. This was an application below Exhibit 84 in the pending suit. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the order impugned is illegal. He read para 7. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions of learned counsel. I have considered the nature of the suit. Order passed by the trial court below application seeking appointment of Court Commissioner and the reply filed by the Gram Panchayat. In my view, the order impugned, cannot be said to be perverse, to be interfered with in extra ordinary jurisdiction. 3. Writ petition stands dismissed in limine, with no orders as to costs. [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.] Dated:08/02/2010. ans/939