Sl.130 30.09.2026 Court No.6 BP C.O. 2345 of 2026 Sri Madan Gopal Pal & Ors. -versus- Sri Narayan Chandra Pal & Ors. Mr. Gopal Chandra Ghosh, Sr. Advocate Ms. Malyasree Maity Mr. Fardeen Hossain ..for the petitioners Mr. Satyaranjan Kundu Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha ..for the opposite parties On the prayer of the learned advocate for the petitioners, leave is granted to the learned advocate on record of the petitioners to correct the typographical errors in the cause title of the civil revisional application. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendants and is directed against the orders dated 26th November, 2025 and 15th June, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court at Tamluk, Purba Medinipur in Title Suit No. 203 of 2024. By the order dated 15th June, 2026 the Advocate Commissioner was directed to conduct the local investigation in terms of the order dated 26th November, 2025 and if the pleadings have not been supplied by the 2 petitioners they were directed to supply the same to the learned Advocate Commissioner. Mr. Ghosh, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that through inadvertence the order dated 26th November, 2025 has also been assailed. He submits that the petitioners are not challenging the order dated 26th November, 2025 passed by the learned trial judge. Such submission of Mr. Ghosh, learned senior advocate for the petitioners is placed on record. Mr. Ghosh further submits that the investigation work was concluded on 29th May, 2026 in violation of the order dated 26th November, 2025. He submits that the petitioners have already supplied the pleadings to the learned Advocate Commissioner well prior to the date of investigation. Heard Mr. Kundu, learned advocate for the opposite parties. He submits that after conclusion of the local investigation the report of the Commissioner has already been submitted. The copy of the order dated 18th August, 2026 filed by Mr. Kundu, learned advocate for the opposite parties is taken on record. A copy of such order is supplied to Mr. Ghosh, learned senior advocate for the petitioners in course of hearing of this civil revisional application. After going through the order dated 18th August, 2026 this Court finds that the learned trial judge has 3 recorded that the Commissioner has already submitted his report which was taken on record. The learned trial judge gave liberty to the parties to inspect the report in open court and further observed that the report shall be accepted if no objection is filed against the report on the next date. The next date has been fixed on 14th December, 2026 for filing of the written objection, if any and acceptance of the Commissioner’s report. After going through the order dated 18th August, 2026 this Court is of the considered view that the learned trial judge has afforded opportunity to the respective parties to file the written objection against the report. After inspection of the report pursuant to the liberty granted by the learned trial judge, if the petitioner is aggrieved with regard to any matter touching upon the point referred to the Commissioner for local investigation or as to the report or as to the manner in which he has made investigation, it will be open to the petitioners to file a written objection against the said report highlighting the issues. If such written objection is filed by the respective parties, the learned trial judge shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass orders accordingly. With the above observations, C.O. 2345 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. 4 Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)