(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 7333 OF 2009 Sau. Nanda Arun Dhande, Age : 34 years, Occupation : Agriculture and Household, R/o. Dhandewadi, .. Petitioner Taluka : Karjat, (Original District : Ahmednagar. plaintiff) versus Jalindar Deorao Surwase, Age : 59 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Dhandewadi, .. Respondent Taluka : Karjat, (Original District : Ahmednagar. defendant) .......................... Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate, for the petitioner. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 11TH NOVEMBER 2009. (2) COURT'S ORDER : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 1st September 2009, passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karjat, below Exhibit 90 in Regular Civil Suit No. 121/2005, thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner, plaintiff, for appointment of court commissioner. 2. Mr. V.D. Hon, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the learned Judge of the trial court has grossly erred in rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner, for appointment of District Inspector of Land Record, as court commissioner. He submits that in view of two conflicting reports, it was necessary that the application ought to have been allowed. 3. The jurisdiction vested in the learned Judge, under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is discretionary one. Unless it is found that the discretion exercised has been exercised with perversity, no interference is warranted. The learned Judge of the trial court has given sound and cogent reasons while rejecting the application. 4. In that view of the matter, no perversity is noticed with the impugned order, so as to warrant interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. (3) 5. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp7333