1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5452 OF 2009 1) Bajirao s/o Vitthal Hange, 2) Vasant s/o Vitthal Hange, 3) Dhurabai w/o Rama Hange, 4) Putlabai w/o Vitthal Hange, 5) Sakhubai w/o Laxman Hange, 6) Limba Dharma Aaghav, All R/o-Aagewadi, Tq-Kaij, Dist-Beed. ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1) Laxman s/o Shamrao Aaghav, 2) Vitthal s/o Rupa Aaghav, 3) Gangaram s/o Vitthal Aaghav, 4) Bhikaram s/o Vitthal Aaghav, 5) Kisan s/o Baburao Saruk, 6) Barik s/o Bhanudas Saruk, 7) Trimbak s/o Umaji Saruk, All R/o- Aagewadi, Tq-Kaij, Dist-beed. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 ... Mr.U.B. Bondar Advocate for Petitioners. ... CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 21ST AUGUST, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners. The present Petition preferred by the original plaintiffs challenging the order below Exhibit No.110/D in Regular Civil Suit No.40 of 1996 dated 15th July, 2009 passed by IInd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kaij, Dist- Beed. 2. The Petitioners filed Regular Civil Suit No. 40 of 1996 in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kaij for perpetual injunction against the Respondents - original defendants. In the said suit the Petitioners preferred application below Exhibit 110/D under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of Superintendent of Land Records as Court Commissioner to measure Survey Nos. 204, 205 and 206 of village Agewadi. The said application came to be rejected by the impugned 3 order dated 15th July, 2009 passed by IInd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kaij, Dist-Beed on the ground that two Commissioners' report are already on record. The first report submitted by the Advocate who was appointed as Commissioner and second report was submitted by the Superintendent of Land Records, Beed. The said both reports of the Commissioners were not challenged by the Petitioners till filing of the present application below Exhibit 110/D. The trial Court specifically held that when two reports are already on record and more over the Petitioners have not applied to set aside both the reports, there is no question of appointment of third Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. I have gone through the order dated 15th July, 2009 passed by the trial Court. It is crystal clear that when two reports of the Commissioners are already on record in respect of the same disputed land i.e. Survey Nos. 204, 205 and 206 of village Aagewadi, it is not necessary to call third report of the Commissioner. Not only that the Petitioners have not objected for first two reports before filing of the present application. 4 Considering the facts of the present case, I do not find any substance in the present Petition to interfere with the impugned order dated 15th July, 2009 which is well reasoned. Writ Petition is dismissed summarily. [K.K. TATED, J.] asb/JULY09/wp5452.09