1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8722 OF 2010 Sau. Sunita Balasaheb Sanap & anr. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS Mhatu s/o Raoji Nagre ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri V.H. Dighe, Advocate for petitioners ..... CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 27 th September, 2010 PER COURT : 1. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the Commissioner i.e. Taluka Inspector of Land Records has not conducted the site inspection in accordance with the directives issued by the Court and has not taken into consideration the objections raised by the petitioners herein. The report is deficient in material particulars and as such, suitable directions need to be issued to Commissioner. It is also contended that although the measurement is done by the Commissioner on 28.1.2010, he has prepared the report only after three months i.e. on 16.4.2010 and thereafter submitted the report. 2. The petitioners have liberty to raise all objections permissible in law before the trial Court in respect of report 2 tendered by Commissioner. It is also open for the petitioner to cross-examine the Commissioner and secure clarification in respect of the deficiencies appearing in the report/map. If proper case is made out for re-appointing Commissioner for local inspection again, the petitioners have option open to tender fresh application to the trial Court. On presentation of such application at appropriate stage and if the trial Court deem it appropriate, the same be considered in accordance with the provisions of law, and rejection of the application by the trial Court on 23.7.2010 shall not be an impediment in considering such request. With these observations, petition stands disposed of. R.M. BORDE JUDGE fmp/wp8722.10