19-WP-10430-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10430 OF 2026 Mohan Babanrao Palande ..Petitioner Versus Gautam Manikrao Dhumal and Ors …Respondents Mr. Sachin R Pawar, for the Petitioner. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 29th AUGUST 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 11th June 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Shirur (Ghodnadi), whereby an application for appointment of the Court Commissioner to ascertain the actual physical possession of the parties over the disputed property, came to be rejected. 3. Mr. Sachin Pawar, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submitted that the Cadastral Surveyor who had carried out the survey and submitted a report, initially supported the case of the Plaintiff. However, during the course of cross-examination, the Cadastral Surveyor has given an admission that the encroachment is not shown ARS 1/2 ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2026.09.02 15:10:33 +0530 19-WP-10430-2026.DOC on the map and, therefore, it is necessary to appoint another Commission. 4. The submissions cannot be countenanced. 5. The Cadastral Surveyor has already submitted the map and report on the record of the Court. Under the provisions of Order XXVI Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the report and map form part of the record of the Court. The Cadastral Surveyor has already been examined. The import of the purported admission given by the Cadastral Surveyor is a matter of appreciation of evidence. 6. In any event, the Commissioner cannot be appointed to ascertain actual physical possession of the parties at the site. 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction. However, it is clarified that the observations made in the impugned order shall be confined to the determination of the prayer for appointment of the Commissioner. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations while finally deciding the Suit, particularly in respect of the existence or non-existence of the encroachment over the property of the Plaintiff. 8. Petition disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] ARS 2/2