IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.7882/2011 Date of decision: 20.12.2011. Yad Ram ....................Petitioner v. Roop Chand and others .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Rajneesh Chadwal,Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Defendant no.1/petitioner has, in the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, assailed the order dated 13.9.2011(P1) whereby his application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a Local Commissioner has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the defendants/petitioners are in possession of the suit property since last 50 years and thus the plea of possession raised on behalf of the respondents/plaintiffs is without any substance. He submits that to determine the factual position of possession the appointment of Local Commissioner is appropriate remedy for the just and effective decision of the case. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner I find no merit in the plea raised on behalf of the petitioner. In my opinion, the learned trial court has rightly held that it is not for the courts to collect evidence on behalf of the parties, moreso in the present suit for injunction where both the parties are claiming to be in possession as they are at liberty to adduce evidence in support of their respective pleas. In view of the above,finding no merit in this revision petition the same is hereby dismissed with costs of Rs.5000/- to be deposited with State Legal Services Authority,Haryana, Narnaul Branch. 20.12.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge