JUDGMENT :

SUBHASIS DASGUPTA, J.

1. The subject matter of challenge in this case is against the rejection of a prayer for local inspection under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. According to Mr. Buddhadeb Ghosal, learned advocate representing the petitioner/plaintiff, an attempt was undertaken by defendants intending to interfere with the easy movement of the plaintiff in repairing the out side wall of the building, by putting a padlock in the entrance gate in respect of the ‘C’ schedule property, which is commonly enjoyed by both the parties to this case. Reference was drawn by Mr. Ghosal to paragraph 12 of copy of plaint to that effect.

3. Mr. Ghosal further submitted that there had been an ad interim order of injunction granted, restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiffs’ repairing work in the ‘A’ schedule property by availing the ‘C’ schedule strip of land.

4. Since real state of affairs, existing with respect to the ‘C’ schedule land intervening ‘A’ and ‘B’ schedule property, there arose the necessity to propose for local inspection under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the court below without truly adverting the purport of th