IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3682 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 3682 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 3682 OF 2008 Shri Bansilal Shrikishan Bhutada & Anr. ...Petitioners V/s. Namdeo Valu Bodke & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.P.N. Joshi for the Petitioners. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JUNE 26, 2008 DATED : JUNE 26, 2008 DATED : JUNE 26, 2008 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners. 2. The petitioner is challenging an order passed by the trial Court dated 2nd April, 2008 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of Court Commissioner for the purpose of inspecting the suit property was rejected. 3. The petitioner had filed the suit for specific performance in which he claimed that out of the total consideration of Rs.4,41,000/-, a total amount of Rs.1,41,000/- was paid and possession of the property was given to him. He also relied on the agreement dated 23rd February, 2004. He filed an application for - 2 - temporary injunction. During the pendency of this application, he took out an application for appointment of Court Commissioner. The trial Court rejected this application on the ground that the Court Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting evidence. 4. I do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the trial court. It is open for the petitioner to bring on record documentary evidence to establish that possession was handed over to him. No case is made for interfering with the order passed by the trial Court while exercising the writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)