Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37196 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3895 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Agarwal Respondent :- Court Of Additional District Judge Court No. 3 Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendra Singh Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order dated 22.04.2025, whereby an application for appointment of Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC was dismissed. 3. The facts as emerge from the petition are that the respondent landlord granted the possession of the property in question sometimes in the year 2010 on a monthly rent of Rs.10,000/-. The case of the petitioner is that the open piece of land was granted as a tenanted premises, on which the petitioner raised construction suiting the needs for for conducting the Marble business. The written statement was filed by the petitioner on 28.01.2014 to that effect. In the said written statement, a defence was taken that as the landlord had taken certain articles of marbles without payment, the rent was being adjusted from the said outstanding amount. The application for appointment of Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC was filed on 07.03.2025. The said application is on record. In the said application, a direction was sought to issue a commission to inspect the property in the suit and to submit a report about the extent and nature of the construction and also note other relevant things which are brought to the knowledge by the parties during the course of inspection. The said application came to be rejected mainly on the ground that the commission cannot be directed for collection of the evidence. 4. Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC is quoted herein below:- "Commissions to make local investigations— In any suit in which the Court deems a local investigation to be requisite or proper for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute, or of ascertaining the market-value of any property, or the amount of any mesne profits or damages or annual net profits, the Court may issue a commission to such person as it thinks fit directing him to make such investigation and to report thereon to the Court: Provided that, where the State Government has made rules as to the persons to whom such commission shall be issued, the Court shall be bound by such rules." 5. Clearly, the said provision is to enable the Court for the purpose of elucidating any matter in dispute. From the application filed no matter appears, so as to decipher that the Court wanted to clarify any issue. Thus, the application was rightly dismissed. The said order does not warrant any interference. It is surprising that a suit of the year 2012 is still pending. In view thereof, the directions are issued to the JSCC Court to conclude the hearing of the suit positively within a period of six months and to send a report to this Court with regard to compliance. It is made clear that none of the parties shall be granted any adjournment and if any adjournment is sought, a cost of Rs.5,000/- shall be imposed on any of the parties seeking adjournment. The Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court concerned for compliance of the directions as given. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above. Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Arun Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench