1 wp 5014.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5014 OF 2011 Venkat Raosaheb Bankar & others .. Petitioners Versus Dilip Bhanudas Bankar & others .. Respondents Shri Amit S. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 11TH JULY, 2011. PER COURT : . The petitioner is original plaintiff who has filed the suit for perpetual injunction. During the pendency of the suit the petitioner had filed an application for appointment of T. I. L. R. as Court Commissioner for measurement of his land. The said application was allowed. Pursuant thereto the land was measured. Thereafter, the petitioner filed another application for appointment of T.I.L.R. to remeasure the property of the petitioner. The said application came to be rejected. Aggrieved thereby the plaintiff has filed the present petition. 2. Shri Amit Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendants have taken objection to 2 wp 5014.11 the said measurement on various counts, as such, to eradicate the anomalies as are suggested by the respondents the fresh application was filed. There was no impediment for the Court to allow the said application as the petitioner was to bear the expenses for measurement and it would assist the Court in adjudicating the matter in issue. 3. The suit is for simplicitor injunction. Moreover, the land of the petitioner has been measured by virtue of the orders of the Court. The evidentiary value of the said map would only be considered after the evidence of the T. I. L. R. is led. The suit is not for possession or removal of encroachment, nor is for the relief of declaration. In such circumstances, when the T. I. L. R. is already appointed by the Court and pursuant thereto measurement has been carried out, I do not see any error committed by the Trial Court in rejecting the application. 4. In view of the above, no case for interference is made out. As such, the writ petition is dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. At this state the order of the Trial Court cannot be faulted. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/July 11