IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 917/2011 M.S.P.GENERATION CO. LTD ..VS... MURLIDHAR K. KHANKE & ORS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2011. Heard Shri G.E.Moharil, the learned counsel for the petitioner. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the Order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur on 3.1.2011 rejecting an application filed by the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 18 and / or under Order 26 Rule 9 and 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code to either to inspect the spot by spot inspection or to appoint a court commissioner to assess the fact whether the land was accessible from Chandrapur. The trial court/ reference court had rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner. The land was acquired as early as in the year 1991 and no purpose could be served in this matter by inspecting the spot or by appointing a commissioner to ascertain the fact. The parties had already tendered both oral and documentary evidence before the court. There was no occasion for the petitioner to move an application under Order 18 Rule 18 and under Order 26 Rule 9 and 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case the trial court rightly held that the grant of relief was not only not feasible but was also impractical. The court then held and rightly so that no useful purpose could be served by inspecting the spot under Order 18 Rule 18 or by appointing the commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Order passed by the trial court is extremely just and proper and calls for no interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no Order as to costs. JUDGE SMP