IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No.319 of 2004 Date of decision: 28.02.2011. ------------------------------------------------- Harish Sharma and Ors. Petitioners. Versus Krishana Devi and Ors. Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting1? For the petitioners: Mr.K.R.Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Kumar Sood,Advocate. V.K.Ahuja (Oral). The present petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are defendants before the learned Trial Court, against the order dated 28.8.2004 passed by the learned Trial Court allowing the application for appointment of Local Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 3. In view of the allegations made by the respondents in their application that the petitioners have encroached upon the suit land by constructing a retaining wall during the pendency of the case. It was held by the learned trial Court that it was necessary to prove this fact by appointing a Local Commissioner. I find no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Trial Court on the application under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2 Thus, there is no merit in the petition filed by the petitioners/defendants and it is dismissed accordingly. 4. Parties to appear before the learned Trial Court on 25.03.2011 and the learned Trial Court shall proceed with the case on priority basis with notice to the parties. A copy of this order along with record be returned to the learned Trial Court so as to reach there before the date fixed. February 28, 2011 ( V.K. Ahuja ) ( krt) Judge.