1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER Chauthu & Ors. Vs. The Addl. Civil Judge (JD) No.1, Jaipur Distt. & anr. SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3606/2010. DATE OF ORDER: 19 th May, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.P.PATHAK Mr. Prahlad Sharma for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Jaipur District, Jaipur in Case No.6/2009 whereby the application under Order 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure for cancellation of Commissioner's report has been dismissed. Necessary facts for the disposal of the present writ petition are that on the application in the suit filed by the plaintiff, the court appointed Commissioner. The Commissioner after his appointment prepared a report and submitted the same before the learned trial court. The petitioner having felt aggrieved with the report of the Commissioner for the reason that he was not served with any notice by the Commissioner, moved an application before the trial court. The learned trial court after hearing both sides dismissed the application. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 2 The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned trial court has committed jurisdictional error while not considering the fact that no notice was given to him by the Commissioner and the report of the Commissioner being bad in law is liable to be cancelled. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision rendered by the Bombay High Court in the case of Kishore H. Desai Vs. Lilawati Virji Chheda & others- 1993 Civil Court Cases 741 (Bombay). I have considered the submissions made before me and perused the impugned order rejecting the application moved by the petitioner. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned trial court has discussed the matter in detail and stated that in the report of the Commissioner it was specifically mentioned that time and again the petitioner was requested to sign the report but the same was not signed. It is only in these circumstances the Commissioner prepared the report and submitted before the court and the court rejected the application. The authority cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not of any help to him in the facts of the present case. In the present case, notice was issued to the petitioner but he declined to accept notice and the trial court dismissed the application, therefore, I am of the opinion that the writ petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. 3 In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. (S.P.PATHAK) J. BBLM