1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2724/2010. (Anusayabai Ranuba Magare Vs. Sulochanabai Gawande and Ors.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.VH Humbe, Adv. for petitioner; None for respondents, though served. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 25 th October, 2010. ... 1) Heard. 2) The defendant no.5 in on-going suit being RCS No.7/2010 before the learned CJJD, Sillod, vide Exhibit-17 desired appointment of Court Commissioner, which came to be rejected and the said rejection is questioned by the defendant no.5. 3) From the very nature of the application, it is explicit, the defendant no.5 has come with a case that three acres of land is cultivated by him through defendant no.6. Defendant no.5 moved the Court for collecting evidence of possession. One cannot decide point of possession and elucidating the matter by way of Commission.. Therefore, investigation by appointment of Court 2 Commissioner was not imperative. 4) The learned Judge was justified in rejecting such application. It is for the defendant no.5 to independently establish his possession either himself or cultivation through defendant no.6. The Court machinery will not be instrumental in such lis. 5) Reliance placed to the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2006 (9) SCC 221 (Bhaowathmath Vs. Madhav Memorial Pathagar)and reported in 2006 (5) SCC 466 in the matter of Subhaga Vs. Shoba, will not be applicable to be coined as those matters deal with already appointed Commissioner and High Court criticizing or appreciating evidence. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/