1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5017 OF 2009 (Kaveribai wd/o Raosaheb Sanap vs. Dadarao Bhikaji Sanap & Anr.) 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. JUNE 29, 2010. Heard finally Shri Kalwaghe, learned counsel for the petitioner - plaintiff and Shri Gawali, learned counsel for the respondents. Shri Kalwaghe, learned counsel contends that before consideration of Exh. 5, the trial Court has appointed Commissioner to verify the factual position. Shri Gawali, learned counsel states that the Commissioner has been appointed only because of dispute in boundaries and said Commissioner is not expected to report on disputed issue of possession of the property. He relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Yeshwant Bhaduji Ghuse vs. Vithobaji Laxman Ladekar, reported at 2010 (2) ALL MR 694. The judgment pointed out by Shri Gawali, considers the situation on merits and not at the stage of grant of temporary injunction. Here, it is apparent that dispute between parties is about possession of suit property and the description thereof is not very relevant at this stage. The learned counsel for the respondent 2 also stated that the Commissioner is not supposed to report on disputed aspect of possession. The petitioner is seeking temporary injunction to protect his alleged possession of suit property. The aspect of possession can be demonstrated by the parties by placing appropriate material and the Commissioner can't be appointed to find out the party in possession. Hence, with liberty to present respondents to move the application for appointment of the Commissioner again at the appropriate stage, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.