1 wp557.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 557 OF 2011 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mrs. Savita Mapari holding for Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for the petitioners. 1. Heard Advocate Mrs. Mapari with Advocate Mr. Katneshwarkar for petitioner-plaintiff. The petitioner- plaintiff sought appointment of Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code and by impugned order dated 10.01.2011 that application has been rejected. The Court found that the T.I.L.R. had already passed the order in that respect and hence the appointment of Court Commissioner was unnecessary. 2. Learned Counsel by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported at "2008 (8) S.C.C. 671" (Haryana Waqf Board V/s Shanti Sarup and others) contends that in such circumstances even in second appeal at final hearing stage, the Court has found appointment of Commissioner necessary. 2 wp557.11 3. By inviting attention to sheet no. 127 maintained by T.I.L.R. learned Counsel states that at least at three places therein survey number has been overwritten and made to read survey no. 74/2. According to learned Counsel, correct number earlier recorded was 75/2. 4. As yet parties have not lead any evidence, the disputed questions arise and petitioner plaintiff can bring it by leading appropriate evidence on record before trial Court. After such question is found to arise, the trial Court can apply its mind to the challenge and also to the request made by the petitioner. 5. Hence, with liberty to petitioner to apply again if occasion therefor arises, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 27.01.2011 gas/wp557.11