1 wp473.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 473 OF 2011 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. B.S. Kudale, Advocate for the petitioners. 1. Heard. The suit filed by the respondent is for recording evidence of petitioner-defendant. At this stage, he sought an appointment of D.I.L.R. as Commissioner to find out whether the suit property is in existence or not ? That application has been rejected by the trial Court after recording that earlier application moved for the same purpose has been rejected. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that earlier application for appointment of Commissioner and by the present application, appointment of expert was sought. He points out allegations in paragraph no.4 to urge that the pleadings made by the respondent-plaintiff to have such measurement through T.I.L.R. has not still materilised. 2 wp473.11 3. I do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity in the approach of the trial Court. The petitioners- defendants to lead their evidence. 4. If the parties after completing evidence, the trial Court found that it is appropriate to have assistance from the expert, it is open for trial Court to pass appropriate orders. 5. With that liberty, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 21.01.2011 gas/wp 473.11