(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 6470 OF 2009 1. Janardhan s/o. Sopan Chavan. 2. Babu s/o. Sopan Chavan, 3. Pandurang s/o. Nivrutti Chavan. .. Petitioners. versus 1. Panchappa @ Panchakshari s/o. Manmathappa Kolle. 2. Gurlingappa s/o. Manmathappa Kolle. .. Respondents. .......................... Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R.V. Gore, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 and 2. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 19TH NOVEMBER 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 13th August 2009, passed by the learned District Judge-1, (2) Nilanga, below Exhibit 15 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 14 of 2008, thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioners for appointment of T.I.L.R. for the joint measurement of the alleged encroachment. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the learned Judge of the appellate court has grossly erred in rejecting the application by observing that if at the hearing of the appeal, the appellate court finds that the joint measurement is necessary, it can remand the case to the trial court. He submits that the remand in such matter is not permissible in law. 3. The petition challenges an interlocutory order. The appeal is already fixed for hearing. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. However, it is made clear that the observations made by the appellate court, in the impugned order dated 13th August 2009, shall not be taken by it into consideration while hearing the appeal on merits and the same shall be decided on its own merits. 5. With these observations, the petition is dismissed. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE bgp/wp6470