ARUN KUMAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

(1.) In the present revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/plaintiffs have sought to assail the order being No. 70 dated March 2. 2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bankura in T.S. 76/2002 refusing their prayer for local investigation.

(2.) The circumstances leading to the above application are that the predecessor of petitioner Nos. 1(a) to l)(e) and 2 to 12 instituted the above suit for declaration of title and injunction. The O.P./defendants described the disputed property as jungle and not bastu, garden and agricultural land, as claimed by the petitioners. So, the petitioners filed an application under Order 26 Rule 9 read with section 151 CPC for local investigation to ascertain whether there is any jungle in the disputed property etc. which was turned down by the impugned order.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have come up before this Court.

(4.) The object of local investigation under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC is to obtain evidence which from its peculiar nature can best be had from the spot itself, as it enables the Court to properly and correctly