However, in the instant case, there is nothing to be elucidated by appointment of 'Court Commissioner', as it is for the Respondents-Plaintiffs to prove the existence of the plots and also the water chambers and they can very well do so by producing necessary documentary evidence on record; like the 'N.A. Permission' obtained for making of the plots and they can also prove separate water chambers for such plots by producing 'Water Bills', or, the documents showing that such separate water chambers were obtained. They cannot seek appointment of 'Court Commissioner' for the purpose of proving their case.
As stated above, Respondents can definitely prove the same by producing the documentary evidence on record to that effect, which can be easily made available. Hence, the machinery of the Court cannot be used for the purpose of collecting evidence, in order to enable the Respondents-Plaintiffs to prove the facts on the basis of which they are claiming the relief of interim injunction.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Writ Petition No. 1196 of 2017
Decided On: 23.01.2018
Dhondiram Nivrutti Pawar and Ors. Vs. Laxman Khashaba Pawar and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dr. Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, J.
Citation: 2018(2) MHLJ 255.
