1 wp9937.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9937 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. C.R. Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Naikwade, advocate for respondent nos.1 to 7. Contention of petitioners-plaintiffs is, inspite of consolidation the area in his possession remained as it is and therefore to demonstrate that the appointment of Commissioner was sought. Trial Court has rejected it on the ground that prayer was to collect the evidence through Commissioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in peculiar facts, such appointment was necessary. The learned Counsel for the respondents states that as yet the parties have not led any evidence and hence view taken by the trial Court is proper. He also points out that similar application moved earlier also came to be rejected. 2 wp9937.10 3. I am not inclined to interfere in the Petition at this stage. With liberty to parties to move appropriate application again, if warranted after recording of evidence, present Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 10.01.2011 gas/wp9937.11