Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
1. By the impugned order dated 04/02/2019, the application filed by the petitioner under order 26 Rule 9 of CPC for appointment of Commissioner has
been rejected by the learned executing Court, against which this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner/judgment debtor.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned executing Court is absolutely unjustified in rejecting the application for appointment of
the Commissioner to demarcate the land in dispute.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission of the writ petition.
4. The learned executing Court has clearly held that the appointment of Commissioner is not warranted in the facts of the case, as such, the impugned
order passed by the executing Court is purely discretionary in nature, in which I do not find any illegality or perversity and thus, no interference is
warranted under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
5. The writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed.
6. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned executing Court by email/fax. No cost(s).
