1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6064 OF 2008 Shri. Madhukar Parbat Patil & others ....Petitioners. Versus Shri. Narayan Bhika Mahajan & others ....Respondents. Shri. M.M. Bhokarikar , Advocate for the petitioners. Shri.Girish Rane, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 18th JUNE, 2009 PER COURT : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 1st August 2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Raver, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of Court Commissioner. 2. The petitioners/ plaintiffs have prayed for appointment of Court Commissioner so as to examine the Court Commissioner for verifying the factual situation on the suit site. The learned Trial Court has rejected 2 the application vide impugned order. 3. From the impugned order, it can be seen that even the counsel for the present petitioners was not present when the matter was heard though several opportunities were given to the petitioners. Apart from that the learned trial Court has further observed that the Court Commissioner can not be appointed so as to collect the evidence in support of the case of the party. 4. No perversity could be found in the approach adopted by the learned trial Court while rejecting the application. No interference is warranted in the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petition is rejected. [ B.R. GAVAI, J. ] ssc/wp6064.08