-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.337 of 2008 Shri Anandrao Govindrao Panse ..Petitioner vs. 1. Shri Durgaprasad Shrivallabh Panse and others ..Respondents Shri A.M.Joshi for petitioner. Shri S.M.Oak i/b Shri Sagar Joshi for respondent no.1. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 18th March, 2008 18th March, 2008 18th March, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The application on which impugned order is passed is preferred by the present petitioner who is defendant no.1 in Exh.388 in Reg.Civil Suit No.98 of 1995. 2. There was a reply filed to the said application and it appears that the said application is disposed of by the Court Commissioner who has been appointed to record evidence in the suit. 3. There is no dispute that the Court Commission er could not have passed any order on such application, more so, when his brief was limited. His authority was to record evidence -2- and not to pass any order on objections which have been raised during the course of such recording. In such circumstances, the plain duty of the Court Commissioner was to direct the parties to move the Trial Court if they desire any order on Exh.388. That being not done, this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. In the light of the admitted fact that the Court Commissioner has given a ruling on this application, the impugned order cannot be sustained and it is accordingly quashed and set aside. Exh.388 will now be placed before the Trial Court and after hearing the concerned parties the Trial Court will pass an order afresh on this application without being influenced by observations of the Court Commissioner. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)